All true, but I think we are talking about two different things. Yes a copyright remains. But you no longer have control over an item once it leaves your hands. It has been proven again and again here and on the RI. That was my point. I am not condoning it in any way as sharing private information is wrong any way you slice it.
Absolutely false. Trading, selling or giving photos, the copyright remains that of the photographer (or who hired the photographer) unless the copyright is explicitly transferred.
It's too bad when someone you trusted decides to perform an illegal (or immoral) act, but control of the photos does not transfer.
Another analogy, Stephen King writes a book and he gives you a copy. This does not transfer any rights to you. You cannot start making copies of it.
Or, Stephen King writes a book and he gives a copy to some immoral piece of crap. The IPoC makes a copy and gives it to you, tells you that you can post it online and you stupidly do so. You even go so far post along with the book, "Thanks for writing such a great book, Mr. King."
Despite what you were told by the IPoC, you have committed copyright infringment and Stephen King not only has a right to demand the removal of the book, but he now has an actionable case against you and you can tell your side to the judge and hope for mercy.