Hunter Biden left his laptop at the repair shop and never paid for the repairs. After waiting the legally required 90 days, the repair shop became the rightful owner of the laptop and its contents.
Once they owned those photos, they had every right to publish them or do whatever they wanted.
The least the press could ask VP Biden would be, "will you pledge that your son will not be involved in any sensitive discussions or allowed access to any sensitive material?"
Even if there were no corrupt actions at all, Hunter Biden represents every kind of HUMINT leverage imaginable.
So if I sell my laptop that still has some photos on it, the buyer would own the copyright over those photos because they own the laptop?
If I deleted the photos from the laptop, but they used a recovery tool to restore them from the disk, would they still own the copyright then?
What if I have the same photo on two different USB drives, and I sell those to two different people, who owns the copyright then?
That doesn’t seem right. Copyright is not generally attached to a physical medium. You don’t lose copyright by losing ownership of the physical medium that holds a copy of the photos/source code/etc.
Oh yes, you're referring to the pictures of Hunter with a crack pipe in his mouth and things like that. You're correct. I took that to be just proof that they had the laptop. Everyone knows that Hunter has a crack addiction problem.
I think I totally forgot about that because of the censored sex tapes and nudes being published by Gnews which are way more salacious.
I hope someone can step in and do to the Post what Peter Thiel did to Gawker.