more on don't take high-quality photos....

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Kala Pierson <k () unfurl org>
Date: June 17, 2005 7:33:58 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] don't take high-quality photos....


The same thing actually happened in music about 12 years ago.  In the  
early 90s, like a lot of other young composers, I started using a new  
software program that, with some effort, would produce musical scores  
that looked like they'd been engraved by a publisher.  A number of  
Kinko's branches refused to copy and bind my scores, because I  
couldn't produce written permission from a publisher that didn't  
exist (or from a composer they wouldn't believe was me).

By 1995/96, every urban Kinko's employee had seen enough of these  
scores to know what was going on.  Hopefully the same thing will  
happen with photo developers, as the technical level of amateur media  
production keeps improving via new technologies...

Kala


On Jun 17, 2005, at 3:27 AM, David Farber wrote:




> From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb () cs columbia edu>
> Date: June 16, 2005 8:57:29 PM EDT
> To: dave () farber net
> Subject: don't take high-quality photos....
>
>
> By chance, today I saw two interesting -- and in a sense contradictory
> -- articles on digital photography.  The first was straight-forward
> enough: it spoke of the virtues of some of the new digital SLRs,
> especially the Nikon D50, of which it said one can take "big,
> bright, sharp, professional-looking photos, with ultra-sharp subjects
> and gently blurred backgrounds."  Not a surprise, and it's likely
> to attract buyers, possibly even me.
>
> The second article was the flip side, and it's one of our favorite
> betes noirs: overly-aggressive enforcement of copyright laws.  It
> seems that commercial printing operations are required to watch
> for attempts to print copyrighted pictures without authorization.
> Guess what -- good equipemnt, photoshop, and talent can produce
> false positives...
>
> Steve Noble, who's in charge of regulatory affairs for the Photo
> Marketer's Association, noted "We've got a law written back in the
> 1970s and we're trying to apply 2005 conditions to it."
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/technology/AP-Photo-Printing- 
> Frustration.html






-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as [USER_EMAIL]
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/