M10 images leak

Fotobot said:
Freedom of expression is a Constitutional right. Fair use isn't. There is no fair use provision in the Constitution. Try to find it. You won't. Fair use is an exception to an exclusive statutory right, namely, copyright. You are mixing up fair use and freedom of expression. They are not the same thing. They are only related insofar as they fall under the broad umbrella of communication. Lots and lots of things promote communication and sometimes freedom of expression. It doesn't mean you have a Constitutional right to all of them. It also doesn't mean that no contract can ever abridge communication. A Leica M10 would very distinctly and beautifully promote my freedom of expression, but people would look at me like a total fool if I demanded a Leica M10 as a "Constitutional right".

Think about this: Reid asks subscribers to sign a nondisclosure agreement. If your argument about Fair Use being a Constitutional right were correct, no nondisclosure agreement would ever be valid or enforceable. And yet people sign and rely on nondisclosure agreements every day, in numerous fields and endeavors, and for numerous reasons. That's a fact. In other words, people don't sign nondisclosure agreements and then turn around and say Fair Use gives them a "free pass" to renege on the same agreements. That doesn't work because that would make all nondisclosure agreements absolutely worthless and void from the start. You know (or should know) that Fair Use doesn't work that way. If you did some research on nondisclosure agreements, you would find that plenty of them have been ruled to be valid and enforceable.
Click to expand...


Actually Sean does not even ask to sign an NDA. He kindly requests subscribers of his site not to undermine his livelihood by plastering the results of his hard work all over the Internet. So far his readers have -in the main- honoured that request. I like to think that Leica owners will continue to show that decency.
 
benlees said:
Whoever bought the tuna is going to make money from that tuna. Can you say that about a Rolex?
Click to expand...

Possibly if you keep it long enough... a Rolex 6538 bought new for about £250 in 1962 is worth about £60,000 today

Rolex are also fond of semi regular price hikes

A Rolex submariner and a m8 cost ABOUT the same in 2008

Today the m8 is worth a lot less than that secondhand, and the secondhand Rolex will fetch about what you paid for it new

But yeah, no one's getting rich buying modern cameras or watches.

But the depreciation is is far more palatable on watch, their picture taking ability sucks tho :)

EDIT:

Of course a vintage camera might well appreciate in value much like a vintage watch
 
jaapv said:
Just a matter of adding up plusses and minuses. The M240 won out for my use. :)
Click to expand...

I think M240s are going to be a bargain for anyone wanting to get into Leica digital M this year... even if Leica don't drop the price much... my hunch is the ADs are going to have many mint examples taken in px against the m10

As ever with any camera... camera XYZ is scored X out of 10. When a newer version of that camera arrives that scores better out of 10 the older model doesn't get worse, it just gets cheaper
 
jaapv said:
Actually Sean does not even ask to sign an NDA. He kindly requests subscribers of his site not to undermine his livelihood by plastering the results of his hard work all over the Internet. So far his readers have -in the main- honoured that request. I like to think that Leica owners will continue to show that decency.
Click to expand...

This is on the publicly visible subscription page and looks exactly like a simple NDA to me:

"For content security reasons, the site content may not be copied, downloaded, saved or printed. None of the material published on Reid Reviews may be reproduced in any form without permission from the author. One must agree to this before using the site."

I have no problem with it. People have to protect their livelihood and that seems like a reasonable way.
 
Fotobot said:
This is on the publicly visible subscription page and looks exactly like a simple NDA to me:

"For content security reasons, the site content may not be copied, downloaded, saved or printed. None of the material published on Reid Reviews may be reproduced in any form without permission from the author. One must agree to this before using the site."

I have no problem with it. People have to protect their livelihood and that seems like a reasonable way.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that is a copyright notice which would allow fair use. (in the USA)

I was referring to this:

Most camera review sites are supported by a combination of advertising income and commissions from click-through sales of photography equipment. Reid Reviews has always been supported entirely by its subscribers and I think it's very important that a resource like that exists. I want to thank you for your support and for not summarizing the information in reviews like this on forums and the like. I also know that some of you may be pressured by people who want to read the site without paying for it. Thanks for not caving into that. By making these choices, you are supporting an unusual, independent and -- I hope -- useful source of reviews for serious photographers.
Click to expand...
 
Fotobot said:
"For content security reasons, the site content may not be copied, downloaded, saved or printed. None of the material published on Reid Reviews may be reproduced in any form without permission from the author. One must agree to this before using the site."
Click to expand...
While this is very restrictive on how and when a subscriber is allowed to consume the content, this is no NDA. I am generally fine with this, although technically it is not possible to follow the agreement.
 
jaapv said:
Actually Sean does not even ask to sign an NDA. He kindly requests subscribers of his site not to undermine his livelihood by plastering the results of his hard work all over the Internet. So far his readers have -in the main- honoured that request. I like to think that Leica owners will continue to show that decency.
Click to expand...

So, it's not a contract after all? Kindly asking is quite different.

Anyway, personal behavior is subjective until laws are violated.

Consider the very long and rich history of commenting on copyrighted materials. This form of personal expression is not neither inherently unethical or indecent.
 
willie_901 said:
So, it's not a contract after all? Kindly asking is quite different.

Anyway, personal behavior is subjective until laws are violated.

Consider the very long and rich history of commenting on copyrighted materials. This form of personal expression is not neither inherently unethical or indecent.
Click to expand...

Of course it's a contract. You're ignoring my comment about what must be agree to in order to subscribe. :bang: Agreement = contract.

Reid's materials are distributed to subscribers and to subscribers only pursuant to that contract. They are not like newspapers or books which you can read at library or bookstore without paying.

Most sites rely on clicks for revenue, so sharing them works fine for their owners. Reid uses an alternate business model on the Internet; there is no support via advertising, affiliate links, etc. It doesn't work if people share the content.
 
Fotobot said:
Reid uses an alternate business model on the Internet; there is no support via advertising, affiliate links, etc. It doesn't work if people share the content.
Click to expand...

given how many years he's been using this model, seems to be working :)

just saying, havent read his articles personally.
 
Just to get back on topic: This is the camera we are talking about. Note that Leica has miniaturized the main board and folded it to move it away from behind the sensor, removing the major obstacle to thinning the camera.

Content_Bild_M10-USP-7_Maestro-II-Prozessor_2008x1520_teaser-2632x1756.jpg
 
brennanphotoguy said:
http://leicarumors.com/2017/01/29/l...typ-label-compressed-dng-files-and-more.aspx/
Click to expand...
I hoped they would try to explain omitting the video functionality as a technical challenge (in part they did by talking about HDMI and external mics), but it was instead confirmed to be mainly a marketing decision.

I would still like to buy this camera. I would just want it even more if it also offered 4k video capture. To give this statement some perspective, I would have bought the Fuji X-Pro2 and a couple of native lenses for evaluation if it had 4k video. I decided to skip it when it didn't provide this.
 
That is, of course, a condensed version of the FotoTV interview (in German).
There they touch briefly on the real reason that Video was dropped, i.e. the camera is so packed that it would cause heat management problems. The "market reseach" explanation is a bit of marketing spin IMO.

https://www.fototv.de/tutorial/die-neue-leica-m10
 
jaapv said:
That is, of course, a condensed version of the FotoTV interview (in German).
There they touch briefly on the real reason that Video was dropped, i.e. the camera is so packed that it would cause heat management problems. The "market reseach" explanation is a bit of marketing spin IMO.

https://www.fototv.de/tutorial/die-neue-leica-m10
Click to expand...

heat mgmnt issues suggests a potential weakness in the design. market research spin is better as it suggests giving the people what they want.

Personally I have never used the video on my M100. So I would accept the trade off of removing the video functionality so the camera can be thinner and does not overheat.
 
If I were to shoot video I wouldn't use a rangefinder for that (proper tool and all that instead of the one size fits all). For the type of things that the M excels in I think Leica has made some good decisions though I like the size and weight of the M 262 and will probably pick another one up sometime in the future. Hopefully used prices will come down some in the next year or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom