By changing the work, as it's in an intended form (as they make sure the change happens on purpose), so they are really creating a derivative work.

That is not a typo... it's a intended change on purpose.

Did they have the author authorization for doing such and at the same time imply that the author doesn't know how to write???

I hardly believe that...

You are confusing author rights with copy right...

Author right means that the photographer has the right to be recognized as the author of the work.

In most countries, this is transferable (for instance, in Germany it isn't).

Copy rights on the other hand cover the "right to make copies and distribute them".

[be it direct rights or derivative rights, laws are way different from country to country, even if most have signed international conventions, like the Bern]

Copy has no relation whatsoever with commercial or sales... which is another contention point.

For a copyright to be ascertain over a work, there are thresholds to be met... they are fairly low.

BUT a "scan" with a photographic apparatus and with a diffused light does normally fail those thresholds!

The same happens with other kinds of photos...

But the "correct" law related to that, depends again of the country.

The issue is that the "offender" has servers in the us and resides in the us. This means that the law that applies to him is the US law.

As standard practice, it is recommended that you host your stuff in your own countrie to avoid international legal problems...

BUT... IANAL... ;)

Photos are not always copyrighted.

Tons of examples exist all over the world that state that you need to have "artistic" input for creating a new copyright.

The same happens with videos/cinema... that is why you get the "release film", the "directors cut", the "producers cut"... the "cat's cut"... and so on...

Each of them... refreshing that specific copyright... (note... the "specific"... as the original one isn't refreshed by just such "schemas"). ;)

The anti-rfid wallet... ;)

They don't have the right to collect fees from free/public domain music!

The major problem with patents is that they raise the bar for everyone to make a nail...

In the old-times, you only need a anvil, an hammer, and a forge... (and some other tools naturally)...

Now? You need a lawyer... then you can start to think of anything else.

Crazy world...

Old phones are good...

Good for your pocket and the environment.

Remember... that before the 3 R... there are 3 more R... that people [r]arelly use:

[R]efurbish, [R]epair and [R]euse... ;)

If i was a ISP i would be buying an old IBM S40 printer... and contract the production of tons of paper... and all the logs would be directed to the paper...

NO DIGITAL LOGS...

Want the logs... sure... They are in storehouse n34... somewhere... ;)

When money is short in far more important areas... like food and education!

I often wonder why we should worry about some kids looking at smut on the net, when everyday they see war and death and violence (and bloody victims) all over in the news AT PRIME TIME!!!

It just makes my mind boggle...

I do think that like terrorism, the "protect the kids" is being used just as an excuse for harder and more restrictive laws all over the world.

O.o

Convenience...

Just make available in a legal and affordable way the books... in digital form... and those that want... will buy them.

Those that don't want to buy them... will not buy them whatever the cost anyway.

Implying that all copies made are lost sales is the biggest lie around... ;)