Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Web Snapshots Are Nabbed for Commercial Uses

Posted by timothy on from the you-bet-they-are dept.

whoever57 writes "The Washington post has a story about Hollywood studios using photos grabbed off the web without permission. This particular story describes the case of a photo of a dog that was used by Fox. The photo had been uploaded to a personal blog and tagged 'all rights reserved.'"

4 of 92 comments (clear)

  1. GOATSE warning! by croddy · · Score: -1, Troll

    Warning! There is GOATSE at the end of the article!!

    1. Re:GOATSE warning! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Click here to once and for all block Goatse.

  2. No reasonable person by QuantumG · · Score: -1, Troll

    thinks that a happy snap of their pet has any value other than sentimental. If you make pictures of your pet available, I should be free to use them as I see fit.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  3. sample/remix by vlk · · Score: 0, Troll

    Why does the slashdot community have a problem with this, but not with sampling and remixing in the musical context? Is sampling more or less "ethical" if commecial recordings are used (without permission) as source? How about "found sound"? What if the the dog snapshot referred to in TFA was sufficiently manipulated? How different from the original would it have to be before recognized as art on its own merits?