Yes Jaco - I totally agree - what you or I or anyone else for that matter can be shall we say spewing bits of cyberspace nonesense - and that is half the fun.
The real fun is doing your own research! So if I had a question about Copyright Laws - I would probably either obtain a copy of the Law or go to various bonifide legal sites and download a copy of the Law.
startrekker2001 (by the way like your handle are you really into Star Trek?)
Photographs taken by anyone (amueture or professional) are covered under the copyright law - so what you take or I is considered personal "art" (or dog breakfast in some peoples opinions
I keep refering to the "automatic copyright" law (when I have a minute I will find you some links if need be) So your point about putting disclaimers on this site is not necessary. Airstreamphotos already have a copyright to their site Meaning concept, layout, procedure etc. etc of how the site works. The individuals have a copyright to their photos that they post.
Jaco as far as burden of proof in the digital world you are correct - it can be pretty difficult - however there is still the signature of the original digital file - and if it came to it that is how it would be proven.
I just went through an issue with an Internet Website - who reproduced an ad that I had created for my printed publication (the publication is free) However the advertising is paid by the customer) I have a full copyright on the works in hole or in part. The ad was scanned and then used by the same client on an Industry competitor Web Site. In this case it is the publisher of the web site who is in the wrong first, as well as the customer being in the wrong - secondary. The Customer pays for the advertising space in the printed publication and not the design and layout - unless I specifically indicate this in my advertising contract with the customer.
Thus either the Customer must contact me for permission to supply the ad to the Web Site owner or the publisher of the Web site must contact me for permission. Either way copyright infringement could have been avoided with a simple phone call (and of course a reasonable business person).
Jaco - you can ask the moderators - but the only opinion that would be worth anything is written by a lawyer - many cases are different and very unique depending on the full circumstances.
But just remember - you do not have to be a professional photographer to take an amazing photograph - that could end up in Life Magazine - or National Geographic. And if you are interested in how much Photographs cost royalties wise - just take a look at any photo sites that offer "Stock Photography".
I just think the issue is really not that big - everyone knows where the boundaries are - so just don't pawn anything off as your own when you know it is not yours - or the very least provide full credit - even if it is a bogus name such as GT6921 who is refered to as SPK and has an e-mail that is registered with this site and very traceable to the actual person behind the Avatar.