Film frames and copyright

thortate

Hello, thanks for reading my first post, dgrin looks like a hive of activity, I hope I can contribute a little - I've already learned a lot from browsing the threads!
Can any one help with this question, I've made my own film frames for some of my pix, an example here ( http://www.thortate.com/ ) and I've sold one or two of them. I've just been told that this is a breach of copyright - is this the case? I wouldn't think this would be an issue for Kodak's copyright.

MrBook2

thortate wrote:

Hello, thanks for reading my first post, dgrin looks like a hive of activity, I hope I can contribute a little - I've already learned a lot from browsing the threads!
Can any one help with this question, I've made my own film frames for some of my pix, an example here ( http://www.thortate.com/ ) and I've sold one or two of them. I've just been told that this is a breach of copyright - is this the case? I wouldn't think this would be an issue for Kodak's copyright.

First of all, welcome to Dgrin!

Secondly, I am not a lawyer, but I suspect that this is an infringement of copyright. Were you using a Kodak camera? It would be one thing if you had actually blown up a film negative (including the edge of the strip) but it is a different and much more complicated thing if you have just put the Kodak name one something you have created.

Perhaps one of the other dgrinners can help more, but were it me, I would make up a fake film company name to put there.

--Aaron

Shay Stephens

You could put a disclaimer at the bottom of the pages that show this frame saying to the effect "Kodak is a registered trademark of the Kodak corporation. Kodak is not affiliated with this site blah blah blah."

ivar

MrBook2 wrote:

Perhaps one of the other dgrinners can help more, but were it me, I would make up a fake film company name to put there.

I'm no lawyer either, but i have made things like that before. Allthough it was never to sell. Just to prevent any problems i did exactly as MrBook2 suggested. Knowing myself, i probably used "Kadok" film, or "Fiju" film or something to that extend... People who are not into photography, usualle don't even knotice the difference i would imagine...

Oh, and welcome

Shay Stephens

Kadok and Fiju reminds me of...
Marge says they can't afford a store with philosophy just to get a
TV, and the family goes to the Outlet Mall in Ogdenville. Signs
pass: "Paved Road Ends - 64 Miles", "Former Japanese Internment Camp
90 Miles", "Ogdenville - 277 Miles"... Homer and Bart check out the
TVs available in a grey-market store.

Homer: I]gasps[/I Look at these low, low prices on famous brand-name
electronics!
Bart: Don't be a sap, Dad. These are just crappy knock-offs.
Homer: Pfft. I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it. And look,
there's Magnetbox and Sorny.
Salesman: I]walking up[/I Listen, I'm not going to lie to you. Those
are all superior machines. But if you like to watch your TV,
and I mean _really_ watch it, you want the Carnivale'.
I]shows Homer and Bart a TV very similar to their old one[/I
It features two-pronged wall plug, pre-molded hand grip well,
durable outer casing to prevent fallapart...
Homer: Sold. You wrap it up, I'll start bringing in the pennies.

ivar wrote:

I'm no lawyer either, but i have made things like that before. Allthough it was never to sell. Just to prevent any problems i did exactly as MrBook2 suggested. Knowing myself, i probably used "Kadok" film, or "Fiju" film or something to that extend... People who are not into photography, usualle don't even knotice the difference i would imagine...

Oh, and welcome

Art Scott

Welcome to dgrin..........
Your home page looks great.....I think a small change in the spelling would be all that is needed...as Ivar said Kadok or even Kodiak...or Kodac anything that is different....

Again grat looking home page.

thortate

many thanks
many many thanks for the prompt advice, what a welcome!

the 'disclaimer' idea sounded good and playing with the company names too, but I settled with a fictional teutonic 'leichmann' (my dodgy German for light-man.)

Kodak get enough attention anyway! and it would suggest that if the picture is good maybe the film had something to do with it... something that we all know isn't necessarily true!

Thanks again folks :

thortate

Art Scott wrote:

Welcome to dgrin..........
Your home page looks great.....I think a small change in the spelling would be all that is needed...as Ivar said Kadok or even Kodiak...or Kodac anything that is different....

Again grat looking home page.

Thank you, that is encouraging, my first effort at web design!

I took a peek at your site I can see similar interests to mine, I liked the delicate quality of the Iced tree it looks like it could shatter if you touch it!

I'm trying to follow the seasonal changes in interesting trees, but I haven't found one that looks equally great through all the seasons

Thank again,

Art Scott

thortate wrote:

Thank you, that is encouraging, my first effort at web design!

I took a peek at your site I can see similar interests to mine, I liked the delicate quality of the Iced tree it looks like it could shatter if you touch it!

I'm trying to follow the seasonal changes in interesting trees, but I haven't found one that looks equally great through all the seasons

Thank again,

Thank you for the compliments.

snapapple

I could not get into your site. I tried Firefox, Netscape, and Internet Explorer. All said can't find the server or page not available etc.

Art Scott

snapapple wrote:

I could not get into your site. I tried Firefox, Netscape, and Internet Explorer. All said can't find the server or page not available etc.

Which one of our sites?....I just ran thru FF and Opera and....... mine seems to be working fine.

Bandit959

Welome !

I'm also not a lawyer, but let me offer some thoughts.

This will all come down to how Kodak protected their "intellectual property". Did they actually place a "copyright" on the film, register the markings as a trademark or is it considered "merely descriptional information"?

I suspect that this wasn't only a CR issue, but a possible trademark infringment as well. There is a possibility that the words "Kodak" in their specific font is trademarked, even though there isn't a "R" or "TM" associated with it. If you go to their website, the words "Kodak" has a specific color associated with it, and could be a TM. And I would suspect that their "logo" is probablly trademarked as well.

The whole CR/TM is a slippery slope that I would reccomend avoiding if possible. Chaninging the name to Leichmann was probably a smart thing to do.

As for the website, you can get it to load faster if you break your image into a mosaic of 4, 6 or 9 smaller images. That will help the people who still have dial up and that may be contributiong to snapapples' issue.

Again, welcome!

thortate

snapapple wrote:

I could not get into your site. I tried Firefox, Netscape, and Internet Explorer. All said can't find the server or page not available etc.

Is that my site?

Art Scott

Quote:
Originally Posted by snapapple
I could not get into your site. I tried Firefox, Netscape, and Internet Explorer. All said can't find the server or page not available etc.

thortate wrote:

Is that my site?

Thorate, yours has been fine when I have gone into it
I think it was at Snappy's end.......but don't know....I too was hoping to find out which site ..... Hmmmmmmm ????

thortate

The whole CR/TM is a slippery slope that I would reccomend avoiding if possible. Chaninging the name to Leichmann was probably a smart thing to do.



Again, welcome![/quote]

Thanks for all the help folks, this Dgrin is a real inspiration, I feel at home already!
By the way, if anyone wants to use 'Leichmann' on their frames, feel free, I don't mind, I haven't copyrighted it!... (...yet!)

Thor