What's The Deal With YouTube?

[skate323k137]

http://www.geekosystem.com/weaponized-dmca-notices/
/related
loldmca...

[Jrecee]

Another example of how ridiculously oppressive copyright laws can be is that my wife once tried to get some wedding pictures printed at Wallgreens and they wouldn't do it because they said they looked too professional and they didn't believe my wife took the pictures (which she did).

I work as a Wal-Greens Photo Tech and what that guy did was dumbfuckery. If your wife said she took the photos, then the Photo Tech there should have handed her a release form that says that she did take those pictures.

I worked at walgreens as head of the photo lab (doesn't that sound like a position that would pay decently?) and while that was a few years ago, it was pounded into my head by the manager(s) not to print ANYTHING that looked professional. With the advent of consumer DSLRs I can see how they would have finally figured out a workaround for that, since we pissed off about 50 people per day trying to print wedding photos from THE 1940s.

[pakopako]

Another example of how ridiculously oppressive copyright laws can be is that my wife once tried to get some wedding pictures printed at Wallgreens and they wouldn't do it because they said they looked too professional and they didn't believe my wife took the pictures (which she did).

I work as a Wal-Greens Photo Tech and what that guy did was dumbfuckery. If your wife said she took the photos, then the Photo Tech there should have handed her a release form that says that she did take those pictures.

I worked at walgreens as head of the photo lab (doesn't that sound like a position that would pay decently?) and while that was a few years ago, it was pounded into my head by the manager(s) not to print ANYTHING that looked professional. With the advent of consumer DSLRs I can see how they would have finally figured out a workaround for that, since we pissed off about 50 people per day trying to print wedding photos from THE 1940s.

I'm sorry, you're going to have to dumb things down for me. Why aren't you allowed to print stuff that looks like it was taken by an expensive camera?

[Hobie-wan]

I'm sorry, you're going to have to dumb things down for me. Why aren't you allowed to print stuff that looks like it was taken by an expensive camera?

Nono, places are refusing to print copies of pictures that look too professional so they're not breaking some photog's copyright. The rise in awesome cameras has made it where the average person can take some pretty nice looking pictures and quickie development places are erring on the side of caution and pissing people off that actually have taken their own pictures.

[GSZX1337]

Another example of how ridiculously oppressive copyright laws can be is that my wife once tried to get some wedding pictures printed at Wallgreens and they wouldn't do it because they said they looked too professional and they didn't believe my wife took the pictures (which she did).

I work as a Wal-Greens Photo Tech and what that guy did was dumbfuckery. If your wife said she took the photos, then the Photo Tech there should have handed her a release form that says that she did take those pictures.

I worked at walgreens as head of the photo lab (doesn't that sound like a position that would pay decently?) and while that was a few years ago, it was pounded into my head by the manager(s) not to print ANYTHING that looked professional. With the advent of consumer DSLRs I can see how they would have finally figured out a workaround for that, since we pissed off about 50 people per day trying to print wedding photos from THE 1940s.

I only started working at Wal-Greens at the end of February so I don't know when this policy was adopted.

[Hatta]

I'm sorry, you're going to have to dumb things down for me. Why aren't you allowed to print stuff that looks like it was taken by an expensive camera?

Because the racket that professional photographers have going is that they keep the copyright on your wedding photos. You have to go back to them and pay them for copies. Never mind that there are provisions in copyright for "work for hire", which is exactly what that situation is, but try finding a photographer who will do it. Somehow the music industry is able to use work for hire to appropriate the copyright of musicians but as individuals we don't have the negotiating power to take advantage of it. Figures.

[Limewater]

Because the racket that professional photographers have going is that they keep the copyright on your wedding photos. You have to go back to them and pay them for copies. Never mind that there are provisions in copyright for "work for hire", which is exactly what that situation is, but try finding a photographer who will do it. Somehow the music industry is able to use work for hire to appropriate the copyright of musicians but as individuals we don't have the negotiating power to take advantage of it. Figures.

Fortunately, there are some wedding photographers out there now who will do a photo release and give you the copyright. Our photographer did that. It's pretty rare, though.

[Hatta]

Yes, thankfullly. Now that DSLRs are common technology we have the option to do it ourselves. That gives us a leg up in negotiating.