Re:The Danger of E-Books
by Qwertious on Saturday October 17, 2015 @01:00PM
(#10405073)
>Just that they exist would entitle anyone to the right to view them, if they could get them?
You've got the "rights" the wrong way around - it's not that people have the right to see the boudoir photos, it's that people have the right to copy photos they own, and the husband/wife are not allowed to infringe on that right.
Basically, it's not "thou shalt not kill", rather than "right to life", although people implicitly do have the right to copy.
The exception being, obviously, copyright - which is a temporary state-sanctioned monopoly on the right to copy your works (in other words, you're temporarily the sole holder of the copy right), for the sake of producing more artistic works for the general public.
You've got the "rights" the wrong way around - it's not that people have the right to see the boudoir photos, it's that people have the right to copy photos they own, and the husband/wife are not allowed to infringe on that right.
Basically, it's not "thou shalt not kill", rather than "right to life", although people implicitly do have the right to copy.
The exception being, obviously, copyright - which is a temporary state-sanctioned monopoly on the right to copy your works (in other words, you're temporarily the sole holder of the copy right), for the sake of producing more artistic works for the general public.