>> 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]