Copyright And "Professional" Photographs

April 27, 2009 3:58 PM by Manuel Lora

We had my in-laws over the weekend and went around town snapping some photos. My wife wanted to give her parents some photos of the visit. We were tight for time so instead of having prints made through the mail I went to a local photo lab. On the counter, I saw a brochure (a similar online version here) explaining the copyright policy.

The first section is standard:

In our continuing compliance effort with the Federal Copyright Law, Wal-Mart Photo Centers will not copy a photograph that is signed, stamped or otherwise identified by any photographer or studio unless we are presented with a signed Copyright Release from the photographer or studio.

They are just covering themselves to avoid being liable in a possible copyright violation.

The next section is where it gets more interesting:

In addition, we will not copy a photography that appears to have been taken by a professional photographer or studio, even if it is not marked with any sort of copyright, unless we are presented with a signed Copyright Release from the photographer or studio.

Copyrights are granted automatically and works do not require a stamp or other feature. Thus, even if photos are not professional-looking, the owner of the copyright still has the legal right to that work. And though the policy seems to recognize that (since they have to follow the law anyway), preference could be given to the snapshot photograph instead of the advanced amateur, for example.

Indeed, with very little money anyone with enough determination can make photos look much more professional. If I were to bring in a set of nicely lit family shots taken in my home "studio," built with used and cheap equipment from online auction sites, my photos would not bear any studio stamp or signature yet they might be considered "to have been taken by a professional photographer." (To be fair, professional photographers make their own prints or have them printed in professional labs, where the assumption is that the person doing the uploading has the right to those images).

To me, copyright law (along with the rest of IP, especially patents), flies in the face of modern technology and modern distribution channels. "Professional" quality video, still photography, digital animation and music, just to name a few--all these things can and are created at low cost. What used to require a team of hundreds to do, can now be done by a teenager.

This all is another way that IP harms its owner--good amateurs are presumed to be pirates.

Krugman and His Economics of Keynesian Baby-Sitting

March 27, 2009 7:02 PM by Manuel Lora

The awarding of the Nobel Prize in Economics to Paul Krugman has turned him into a kind of spiritual guide to managing the recovery from the current crisis. However, given that his knowledge of the business cycle leave a lot of be desired, his recommendations are hardly adequate.

Perhaps the easiest way to prove that Krugman's Keynesian perspective is altogether useless in understanding the workings of an economy is by using the example that he himself sorts to when explaining the business cycle: the baby-sitting cooperative.

Continue reading "Krugman and His Economics of Keynesian Baby-Sitting" »

New Mises.org Chat Room

January 25, 2009 2:21 PM by Manuel Lora

Mises.org has launched a new chat room to discuss Austrian economics, libertarianism and other related issues.

The web interface is a front-end to the IRC server irc.freenode.net #mises.