https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Blog_talk%3AMain%2FECSA%3A_downloading_is_not_duplication%2Fc000004 2026-09-14T23:10:46Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.19.24 https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?title=Blog_talk:Main/ECSA:_downloading_is_not_duplication/c000004&diff=10265&oldid=prev 2013-02-03T23:35:20Z

<p>New comment by Abassos: I&#039;m not sure I understand the other premise either. That Ritchie and Barger stand for the proposition that downloading is required for possession of an online image. I think...</p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>I'm not sure I understand the other premise either. That Ritchie and Barger stand for the proposition that downloading is required for possession of an online image. <br /> <br /> I think they stand for the proposition that viewing an image on a website is not possession. Because it's like looking at a painting in a museum. You and the painting are in the same place, but that doesn't mean you possess it.<br /> <br /> However, lets say I walk up to the painting, rip it off the wall and paint clothes onto the 15th century nude. Now I've possessed it. But I haven't duplicated it.<br /> <br /> The same thing can be done on the internet. Without downloading an image, you can digitally manipulate it. So what if you digitally painted clothes on a porn picture and reposted it. You have possessed the porn but the duplication was done to the de-porned image. Like [http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/work-safe-porn &quot;Work-Safe Pron&quot;]</div>

Abassos@mpdlaw.com