>> does not the individual who actually 'grabs' the image
>>and then transfers it into some kind of presentational format equally
>>'producing' the image - i.e. what the prod-dist companies own is the
>>>>moving picture image, while we are producing a specific still.

      . . . now hold on juist a minute . . . as someone who has
     admittedly palyed fast and loose with various copyright
     regulations, and who will strecth the fair use exemption
     to and beynd the breaking point, i find this arguement
     so self-seeking as to be intolerable . . . it's akin to saying
     that the writer of the novel own the whole novel but not
     any of the chapters within it . . . or that edward albee owns
     his plays but any one of us can with impunity publish favorite
     bits of dialogue from them . . . stealing something from
     someone else may involve some work, but please let's not be
     hypocritical enough to call it "producing an image"

     there may be many solid grounds for refusing to abide by
     copyright regulations . . . this is not one of them  . . . for once
     we have an issue that's not murky at all, and let't not hide behind
     our favorite cloud of fog to justify that which is unjustifiable

     mike

----
To sign off Screen-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF Screen-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]