Originally Posted by wfeller Actually I'm thinking the mountain on that mural looks like Cowhole Mountain at the far end of Soda Lake- so it may be authentic. Stay tuned. Her attorney called again today and said wait another week.

Cowhole has two mounds, a much wider aspect ratio, and Old Dad Mountain is not that rugged, even back adding a few tens or hundred thousand years of erosion.

Only way that looks anything like Soda Lake it is if you look at it in Google Earth with vertical exaggeration cranked to the max, and besides, where's the lake?

They just run hot and cold on these murals huh? Either producing a nice mural by copycatting other people's work, or a poor mural without. Better course would be to use legal inspiration, like you said, there are many people out there with sourcework that would have been pleased to contribute, with attribution, plus or minus payment.

Originally Posted by kolibri Cowhole has two mounds, a much wider aspect ratio, and Old Dad Mountain is not that rugged, even back adding a few tens or hundred thousand years of erosion. Only way that looks anything like Soda Lake it is if you look at it in Google Earth with vertical exaggeration cranked to the max, and besides, where's the lake? They just run hot and cold on these murals huh? Either producing a nice mural by copycatting other people's work, or a poor mural without. Better course would be to use legal inspiration, like you said, there are many people out there with sourcework that would have been pleased to contribute, with attribution, plus or minus payment.

I think I got my mountains and holes mixed up. Cowhole, sheephole, owlhole, ... I know what holes I've been stuck though, and which way to go when I get unstuck.

The mural being worked on now, is one of the cold ones. In her letter to me she said they were going to use "another photo." It must be the next one- this isn't using the same technique- at all.

For $6k-$8k I wonder how many authentic muralists, decent ones, would make their way to town? I believe the bidding process is,... stagnant.

In response to something mentioned earlier, now that I think about it, I've never said I wasn't going after the painter. I'll have to see what happens.

This program could have been such a good thing, and I even thought it was when I heard about it at the OST symposium a few years ago. I believe that was about the time the original program director left.

There are certain phrases that reverberate poorly in my head; "Master Artist", "to beautify Barstow", "non-profit", "for the children." I'm seeing little more than a conflict of interest. I wonder if they'll get paid to replace the mural that they took down?

Next week should be interesting. I'll continue my research.

-

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, ...

http://oasisofmurals.com/

There've been a few of these I've enjoyed while eating a sloppy burrito in the parking lot.

Today's extended deadline, self-imposed by the Main Street Murals attorney has came and gone... Good thing I didn't hold my breath. :-)

At this time I've removed all but the comparison photo of the mural to my original image. This may, or may not be temporary. The situation has not been resolved as of this posting. ;-)

Originally Posted by wfeller At this time I've removed all but the comparison photo of the mural to my original image. This may, or may not be temporary. The situation has not been resolved as of this posting. ;-)

Wow. When you say removed, you weren't kidding. :-)

I'm guessing your well documented chronology of this began to rattle some nerves and has worked out to a satisfactory financial agreement?

And just because it's off that page doesn't mean it's gone from the internet.


.

Originally Posted by M38A1 Wow. When you say removed, you weren't kidding. :-) I'm guessing your well documented chronology of this began to rattle some nerves and has worked out to a satisfactory financial agreement? And just because it's off that page doesn't mean it's gone from the internet. .

I did leave the photo comparing the mural to my original work. It has been, and will continue to be interesting. Who's to say what turns the future may take?

I noticed a little while ago in the system log that the attorney came through and took a look-see at the page. I feel like flicking it back on-and off-and on-and-off,...
-*fnurk*-

Crazy! Does everyone simply not care about copyrights anymore?!?

Originally Posted by SamirD Crazy! Does everyone simply not care about copyrights anymore?!?

It seems so sometimes. I've been reconsidering the way I use my photos, the way I share, and the way I publish online. I've also been registering my work and registering my work before publishing anywhere. Nobody will care about my work unless I do first. This has happened before, it is happening now, and I'm fairly sure this will happen again. I'm thinking the key elements are to be right, and tenacious. I believe a good working knowledge of copyright law, real copyright law, is just as invaluable to a photographer as a knowledge of business practices--both allow us to make choices and control our work, our creativity.

Originally Posted by wfeller It seems so sometimes. I've been reconsidering the way I use my photos, the way I share, and the way I publish online. I've also been registering my work and registering my work before publishing anywhere. Nobody will care about my work unless I do first. This has happened before, it is happening now, and I'm fairly sure this will happen again. I'm thinking the key elements are to be right, and tenacious. I believe a good working knowledge of copyright law, real copyright law, is just as invaluable to a photographer as a knowledge of business practices--both allow us to make choices and control our work, our creativity.

It's amazing how much of a burden protecting the work has become these days. Sometimes it's right up there with the operation of the business itself.

But I admire your persistence. Most give up like I did.

Originally Posted by SamirD It's amazing how much of a burden protecting the work has become these days. Sometimes it's right up there with the operation of the business itself. But I admire your persistence. Most give up like I did.

The more I learn about it, the more necessary protecting one's work seems to be, however, I don't think it will be such a burden as the system is learned and acclimated to. It will become part of the process, the documentation, the registration of the work. Then the defense of your work becomes an active defense, and it may be easier to stick with it.

This particular situation I'm dealing with has brought the whole copyright issue to a head for me. I've realized that like it or not, inconvenient or not, or intentional or not, it's part of our modern reality. If I don't protect my work, nobody else will.

The U.S. Copyright Office is making things easier, and submissions for certain types of work can be made electronically. They keep changing things. Improving. There were some modifications made last night in fact. As time goes on I'll be trying to keep up with the process for myself, others in my little art group I hang with and those in the virtual world.

http://aeve.com/copyright/

The real deal is at

http://copyright.gov/

-w

I agree that it's getting easier to protect yourself. The electronic filing with the copyright office definitely helped streamline the process. And sites like tin eye are definitely helping as well.

As the reality of enforcement comes to head for publishers, the protection process will be easier for us too.

Walter,

Do I read correctly that to file a copyright it presently cost $35.00 per image?

If so, that could really get expensive!

Originally Posted by rwells Walter, Do I read correctly that to file a copyright it presently cost $35.00 per image? If so, that could really get expensive!

No- you can submit multiple images from what I understand. I put about a dozen in my first batch and have twice that in the second. I'm hoping to develop a system where I can keep a file open and submit every two months of the previous three months work. That way they fit into the 90 day requirement. Now, something I just found out is that to electronically submit, they cannot have been published any other way than electronically or they will not be accepted electronically and have to have 2 physical copies sent in. I think they just started the ECO late last spring so the bugs are still being worked out. I figure it will cost anywhere from to $140/yr (if quarterly) - $210/yr (if every other month) to have the advantage of copyright registration. It may not stop anything, but it allows a judgement to include statutory damages- and that's some juice to encourage a settlement or for an attorney to become involved if need be.

Thanks for the info Walter!

BTW, I looked at your website. You have very nice work there

Originally Posted by wfeller No- you can submit multiple images from what I understand. I put about a dozen in my first batch and have twice that in the second. I'm hoping to develop a system where I can keep a file open and submit every two months of the previous three months work. That way they fit into the 90 day requirement. Now, something I just found out is that to electronically submit, they cannot have been published any other way than electronically or they will not be accepted electronically and have to have 2 physical copies sent in. I think they just started the ECO late last spring so the bugs are still being worked out. I figure it will cost anywhere from to $140/yr (if quarterly) - $210/yr (if every other month) to have the advantage of copyright registration. It may not stop anything, but it allows a judgement to include statutory damages- and that's some juice to encourage a settlement or for an attorney to become involved if need be.

You're welcome Randy, and thank you.

On matters otherwise: A call from the attorney today confirmed more delay- Things have been mighty quiet, but that is in no way meant to imply things have died down or are over.

So, nearly a month later-- There have been some very interesting developments, and I refuse to let this go. I didn't want this thread to drop off into oblivion just yet.

Originally Posted by rwells Walter, Do I read correctly that to file a copyright it presently cost $35.00 per image? If so, that could really get expensive!

no.....my old forms / notes that I have (5-7 yrs) say one disk (CD at a time and that was approx 750 images....the images had to be numbered or titled in some way.....but if you changed a title for some reason the "new" image would need to be re-filed with the new name...electronically when I actually called and talked with them it was about the same....

Hope that Helps...

I would like to thank everyone for their support and hard work in this matter. This situation has been satisfactorily resolved and we will be working in a positive direction in the future. May Barstow and the entire High Desert area be a better place for the efforts expended. Again, thank you to everyone!