Posts by giovanni tiso
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
players like Muntari are legends in African football
Really? I had no idea. I can think of other players on the team who deserve the tag a lot more than him based on ability.
Although this year he did have a little legendary moment for his club. He came on as a substitute for a game at Catania in the second half. Within 30 seconds, he chopped an opposition forward from behind outside the box and got booked. For the subsequent free kick, he was part of the wall, which was set up inside the area. The bail sailed high above him and for some reason he palmed it down, volleyball stile. So he was sent off, Catania got a penalty - which they scored - and undermanned Inter went on to concede two more goals and lose the game 3-1. The whole thing lasted 90 seconds and that's including the time it took to set up the wall and take the free kick. Almost cost Inter the scudetto.
-
Seriously, I need to claim ACC on that.
-
You jest, but:
Never do that again to us. My eyes!
-
I mean more the imbedding of an image than the 'linking to'. That certainly what was a big issue when my uni library put up digital collections of art.
Yes, but all these disclaimers refer to linking, not embedding.
-
In order to contact a particular person at a branch via email, you would send your message to a general 'such and such branch' address, with an 'attn so and so' in the subject line, and people at that branch would then either call attention to it or - get this! - *print it out* for the recipient's perusal.
And in the case of video attachments, groups of librarians would re-enact the scene and film it on VHS. A-la Be Kind Rewind.
True story.
-
Wow, that links takes me back! Love Russell's little artwork at the bottom and Fred Dagg's quote.
-
So what was his opinion?
Her opinion was that technically the authors of the catalogue had an enforceable claim. Moreover in the catalogue itself there was a very lenghty legal notice about the near-sacred nature of those pictures based - it seemed to me - entirely on the fact that they were in private hands.
-
The material in question is not publicly available - it almost exclusively belongs to private collections and museums. It just so happens that copyright on it has expired.
-
Its been argued that photographic reproductions of public domain art, contain no creative merit. And is there for unable to be copyrighted.
I'm talking about a right in law, as per the opinion of a copyright lawyer friend regarding my scanning of public domain artworks from an out of print but still quite recent catalogue.
(I know, I'm making this thread about copyright - the Godwin law of PAS strikes again.)
I agree with you on the (lack of) actual merit of these claims.
-
which incidentally claimed Te Papa owned copyright on scanned public domain image
Copyright in the images, or copyright in the reproductions that appear on their website? Because that's quite a vexed issue. I understand they are allowed to claim the latter.