Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Copyright Advocacy Group Violates Copyright

Posted by kdawson on from the how-to-thoroughly-discredit-yourself dept.

word munger writes "Commercial scholarly publishers are beginning to get afraid of the open access movement. They've hired a high-priced consultant to help them sway public opinion in favor of copyright restrictions on taxpayer-funded research. Funny thing is, their own website contains several copyright violations. It seems they pulled their images directly from the Getty Images website — watermarks and all — without paying for their use."

4 of 176 comments (clear)

  1. Like Billy Joel said... by WwWonka · · Score: 4, Funny

    Those in glass houses shouldn't throw someone else's copyrighted stones.

  2. Re:didn't we already pay? by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 5, Funny

    If the research is funded by the public, didn't we already pay to see it?

    Ah, but you didn't pay for the results. Results costs extra. Good results cost even more.

    --
    "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
  3. Re:didn't we already pay? by MyLongNickName · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ah, but you didn't pay for the results. Results costs extra. Good results cost even more

    But dumb looks are still free.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  4. Re:How Do You Know??!! by UserGoogol · · Score: 4, Funny

    Technically no, but a person who pays for a stock image and then keeps the watermark on is retarded. Thus, either they are hypocritical or they are retarded, and I try to be generous.

    --
    "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor