Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-04-2013, 10:07 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,134,648 times
Reputation: 9409

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basic Problem View Post
Hmmm I see no copy right claim or under penalty of...violation of law claim for the use or mis-use of the photo.

Then again, knowing Obama he is likely to call in the CIA to fly a drone over the house of someone that alters and uploads the photo, to drop a bomb on them, then have it investigated and reported as a meth lab or gas leak explosion.
Because government documents are not subject to copyright. Those who believe this type of "prohibition" would stand up in court don't have any idea what they're talking about. This photo is public property and will be subject to archiving standards, as is all public property eminating from the Executive Branch.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-04-2013, 10:08 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,134,648 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Matter of fact the link for the license is right there:

The WH needs a class on copyright law.
Exactly right. A few people on this forum needed to read this. Thank you for posting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2013, 10:10 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,134,648 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
Guess what?!

The White House photographer and every other photographer, writer, painter, etc that has ever lived doesn't want people using their works without permission.

Goodness, talk about reaching for something!!!

FYI- This warning:

appears on every single Flickr White House photo published on the site.

Guess what else? A similar warning is captioned with many other photographers' work on that site too!

You people....
The photo is not subject to copyright laws. Barack Obama does not own the picture. Neither does the White House photographer. It is subject to public archiving standards just like every other photo that comes out of the Executive Branch. Educate yourself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2013, 10:25 AM
 
Location: Too far from home.
8,732 posts, read 6,785,535 times
Reputation: 2374
Ahhhhhh, so it begins. How long will it be before your tongue will be cut out for speaking against our Leader? How long will it be before your hands are chopped off for defacing our Leader's image that will appear on all government buildings and on billboards along every major highway? Or will it be more civilized and punishment will be a mere 5 years in prison???

Respect your Leader!!!!!

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2013, 11:07 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,074,696 times
Reputation: 17865
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
Guess what?!

The White House photographer and every other photographer, writer, painter, etc that has ever lived doesn't want people using their works without permission.
When a photographer is an employee the copyright belongs to the employer, in this case the US government. Publications by the US government are not subject to copyright.

The only thing that might result in a court case over these images is if someone used them for commercial purposes such as to sell a product and in that case it would be the President having to sue someone as private individual for using his likeness to endorse a product.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2013, 11:52 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,318,510 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
You mean the WH that is paid for by me, the US Citizen? Yup, I can use MY property any way I like.
Oh really? So I can just waltz right into the Oval Office because I, as an American, own it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2013, 11:54 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,318,510 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
The photo is not subject to copyright laws. Barack Obama does not own the picture. Neither does the White House photographer. It is subject to public archiving standards just like every other photo that comes out of the Executive Branch. Educate yourself.
Totally.missed.the.point.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2013, 11:57 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,318,510 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
When a photographer is an employee the copyright belongs to the employer, in this case the US government. Publications by the US government are not subject to copyright.

The only thing that might result in a court case over these images is if someone used them for commercial purposes such as to sell a product and in that case it would be the President having to sue someone as private individual for using his likeness to endorse a product.
Yes, I got that. LOUD AND CLEAR. I know quite well how it works. My statement was towards those that somehow believe the statement, while ill conceived, was somehow a nefarious "Marxist" scheme to control free speech. It is a very common practice to have such statements accompanying photographs.

I am pretty sure the White House gets it too, even without us CD'ers telling them so.

Copyright Policy | The White House
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2013, 12:11 PM
 
17,401 posts, read 11,982,916 times
Reputation: 16155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
Oh really? So I can just waltz right into the Oval Office because I, as an American, own it?
Oh yea, here we go. Oversimplification, ala "granny will DIE if we cut spending" liberals, complete with eye rolls.

The Oval Office has to bend to security concerns. What sort of breach of security happens if you use an image put out by the WH?

Figures, liberals are defending the Idiot-in-Chief. As his record with the Courts has shown, he's pretty much wrong about EVERYTHING.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2013, 12:19 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles, California
4,373 posts, read 3,230,467 times
Reputation: 1041
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Yet, here you are.
Here I am.

I pop in to see if he's learned what Marxism is yet and just like a rat hitting the pleasure button, he has no idea. Can you really scrutinize me for attempting to teach him what something is instead of just blasting him senselessly?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top