Thanks for your input K2B... It does make one wonder what our 20-something kids are learning (life lessons) and their interpretation of reality. BTW, I like your daily self port gallery. Keep it going.../quote]
Oy! Don't get me started about learning life lessons, just today, we have been discussing taking back some of the folks we deal with back kindergarten to teach them all over again!
Oh, and Thank you.
I have really enjoyed reading this post, I have learned a lot... some I may take with a grain of salt, but still an interesting topic for a novice like me....
What I'm talking about are the new commercials that run on new releases when you first pop them in (and you can't skip over them). I know there's the FBI warning too-- but now most movies have actual commercials that call illegal copying of the movies "theft" and compare it to stealing a car.
Ahhhhhhh... OK. I'll have to pay more attention the next DVD I watch.
Oy! Don't get me started about learning life lessons, just today, we have been discussing taking back some of the folks we deal with back kindergarten to teach them all over again!
My wife has a saying that the "brain fairy" usually shows up about the age of 2 in dogs...
...and 30 in humans!
My wife has a saying that the "brain fairy" usually shows up about the age of 2 in dogs...
...and 30 in humans!
:lol4:lol4:lol4
That's great! I'm going to have to remember that one. Unfortunately, it seems many people by 30 have developed just enough instinct to hide from that fairy.
What is 20 minutes of you life worth?
Because it appears to me there are hours worth of effort devoted here to this pointless issue.
Is $20 worth this much effort? For an image that's probably 4"x6" at screen res? Better to just ask for a by line and be done with it. Generosity will earn you far more in the long run. No, I didn't read all 50 responses, I lost interest after 3 due to the sheer banality of trying to own something that exists in cyberspace. The actual harm here is nil & the only folks agonizing over copyright on such a small scale are the wannabe waneabe pros shooting little league games. People, wake up and realize you've got better things to worry about. Go kiss your spouse and tell your kids you love them, go blow some bubbles, or, better yet, make some new work that you love.
As the wise man one said: pick your battles.
Just my $.02.
Elwood: It's 106 miles to Chicago, we've got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses. Jake: Hit it.
IMPO it has nothing to do with "What is 20 minutes of you life worth?" but more towards the ethics of the matter, the principles involved and the precedence this example sets for all who have to deal with me now and in the future. I, personally, will not tolerate it.
ADDITION: I kiss my DW and kids multiple times a day. For these wonders I am truly grateful.
Because it appears to me there are hours worth of effort devoted here to this pointless issue.
Is $20 worth this much effort? For an image that's probably 4"x6" at screen res? Better to just ask for a by line and be done with it. Generosity will earn you far more in the long run. No, I didn't read all 50 responses, I lost interest after 3 due to the sheer banality of trying to own something that exists in cyberspace. The actual harm here is nil & the only folks agonizing over copyright on such a small scale are the wannabe waneabe pros shooting little league games. People, wake up and realize you've got better things to worry about. Go kiss your spouse and tell your kids you love them, go blow some bubbles, or, better yet, make some new work that you love.
As the wise man one said: pick your battles.
Just my $.02.
Johnny, You're probably right. Hey I checked out your site. Really beautiful shots and I like the way you designed the presentation also.
BTW - I've taken a copy of your shot of Manarola, Italy. It will be perfect for a campaign I'm working on for Starbucks. Thanks.
BTW - I've taken a copy of your shot of Manarola, Italy. It will be perfect for a campaign I'm working on for Starbucks. Thanks.
Hey that's great, Angelo. Can you email me a copy so that I can include Italy with our school's international day postcard sets we are printing and selling?D
Hey that's great, Angelo. Can you email me a copy so that I can include Italy with our school's international day postcard sets we are printing and selling?D
Sure! See anything else you might need? I'm thinking of going back for seconds myself.
Hiya Seymore,
Actually, I really do understand what you mean about the principle of the matter. I just think there a point to which people become obsessed with this issue. Having your stuff out there on the web & in the world for people to see means giving up some control. I think to a certain extent we just need to accept that & worry about the things that really matter, like working on our craft.
Elwood: It's 106 miles to Chicago, we've got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses. Jake: Hit it.
Hey RogersDA & Angelo!
Glad you like! I just realized I had 'Protected: Yes' set in my customization, but I've set to 'Protected: No' so you can download the larges now. Ok, so now that you've got them, take a look at this link about printing and resolution:
See, the Large you've downloaded will be less than 1.5" x 2" when you try to print it on those coffee cups and postcards. You need 300dpi at final size for that. 200dpi will give you a decent inkjet print, but you're talking about an image that will be 3" x 2".
This is what I'm talking about. Sure, you can use it on the web, plenty of rez there, but not in print. I couldn't care less about how it gets used on the web because it's cyberspace. The only people making money selling access to screen rez images in cyberspace are porn sites.
My full rez originals are NOT available for download because those could actually be reproduced photographically or in offset litho.
So, if you want the Manarola shot @ 300dpi so you can print it, let me know, I'll make you a great deal! $20 should be enough to compensate me the time I spent sharing this enjoyable conversation about resolution with y'all.
Elwood: It's 106 miles to Chicago, we've got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses. Jake: Hit it.
Hey RogersDA & Angelo!
Glad you like! I just realized I had 'Protected: Yes' set in my customization, but I've set to 'Protected: No' so you can download the larges now. Ok, so now that you've got them, take a look at this link about printing and resolution:
See, the Large you've downloaded will be less than 1.5" x 2" when you try to print it on those coffee cups and postcards. You need 300dpi at final size for that. 200dpi will give you a decent inkjet print, but you're talking about an image that will be 3" x 2".
This is what I'm talking about. Sure, you can use it on the web, plenty of rez there, but not in print. I couldn't care less about how it gets used on the web because it's cyberspace. The only people making money selling access to screen rez images in cyberspace are porn sites.
My full rez originals are NOT available for download because those could actually be reproduced photographically or in offset litho.
So, if you want the Manarola shot @ 300dpi so you can print it, let me know, I'll make you a great deal! $20 should be enough to compensate me the time I spent sharing this enjoyable conversation about resolution with y'all.
John:
All joking aside... of course I took nothing from your site but you can't be so ignorant of the potential of your images to think that low-res shots aren't valuable and entirely usable by companies launching commercial websites every day.
Half of my photo purchases, as a creative director, are for web use. I've paid as much as $3500 for a low-res, small scale image with limited use, so I have no idea how you equate our discussion with porn sites.
While you may think a thread like this is a waste of time, I rather take the position of helping to protect others, particularly newcombers to the business, from repeating mistakes.
Now, what if I were working on a website or an email based ad campaign for, oh let's say Intercontinental Hotels and I came across your site and liked the images and decided they fit the theme of my project and just took them?
Would you feel differently?
You see, this business is not just about selling prints and coffee mugs. It's about creating compelling images that have value, both artistically and commercially.
Hey Angelo,
Actually, I really do know what you mean, and this forum isn't a waste of time in the slightest. In fact, I had a copyright issue this week with an artist I work with. We agreed on a simple usage statement and it further depened our valuable professional relationship.
It's just hard seeing folks get so worked up over 'infringement issues' when it's something very small scale that is impossible to prosecute unless you're able to afford lenghty litigation. A bit of generosity will often reap much larger rewards and help to develop relationships with clients.
Angelo, If you see something on my site that so outstanding that you need it I say go for it. I assume my images will be used in this way because my site is public. A photo credit would be great if you're inclined to include it. I figure you'll contact me if you need the hi-rez for something that's going to be published.
I just think there needs to be a logical balance, especially when it comes to low-resolution images. Generosity is also something that newcomers to the business need to understand. Your best work will come from referrals, and you get those by being the type of person that people want to work with.
So the conversation here is indeed appreciated!
Elwood: It's 106 miles to Chicago, we've got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses. Jake: Hit it.
John:
Half of my photo purchases, as a creative director, are for web use. I've paid as much as $3500 for a low-res, small scale image with limited use...
Angelo -
hmmm, I doubt these are worth that much, but i'll take half that
But I do have more...
"Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to. Oh well."
-Fleetwood Mac
Johnny... I understand what you're saying. But my believe is that if you let one small item slide, you're just setting yourself up for a bigger fall... if it were ever to happen. I also have learned much with all the feedback here.
I'm no lawyer and there is a lot about this stuff I do not understand but I do know there is a lot of truth in the above statement. I know that sometimes companies will protect their trade-marks very aggressively, even going after Mom and Pop outlets. It sometimes makes the company look like the evil giant going after someone who is profiting maybe a few hundred bucks, at most. In reality what happens is you cannot make it appear as if you protect your trademarks and IP in a hap-hazard or discriminatory manner. Because then a big dog comes to town and starts to infringe on your rights and can get away with it because you have shown a past history of not enforcing your rights. It has happened before.
While I do not like slippery slope arguments as a general rule sometimes the slippery slope is very real. Protect your rights as often as you can and don't be tempted to let something slide just because the infraction is minor.
Hi Seymore,
The copyright agreement was really simple. It says that I retain copyright and the artist has unlimited use of the images but excludes resale in any form. This gives the artist the freedom of use he's looking for while protecting my copyright, so everyone's happy.
I was paid up-front for the shooting and processing and supplied a disk. The copyright agreement and attribution statement were included on the disk with the images.
BTW, care to share, at the least, the gist of your usage statement for us new photo-biz upstarts? I would like to see your frame of mind when it comes to writing usage statements. And take this to PM or email if you feel it's needed.
Elwood: It's 106 miles to Chicago, we've got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses. Jake: Hit it.
Hi Seymore,
How about faxing your aggrements and having them signed and faxed/mailed back to you?
It is my understanding from researching the government's website that there's a difference between a copyright statement and a copyright agreement. That website (included in Angelo's thread) is particularly helpful on the details.
The Ron Seymore site is an interesting approach but it makes me nervous about even clicking through to the pix! Fortunately his work is pretty amazing. But definitely this approach is an option to consider.
Elwood: It's 106 miles to Chicago, we've got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses. Jake: Hit it.
I know I have been on sites that made me check a box after I read all the legal stuff (of course all I really had to do was pull the legal statements down and clik the box at bottm, but I prefer to spend the 20 minutes actually reading them) and that check mark was also my digital signature assuring the site that I was of legal binding age in my state and could legally be held responsible for the signing of the contract.........just one I had remembered from signing for my dsl andI have read others for different sites.......so yes you can do it by email if the wording is correct that a typed and / or box check is considered a digital signature.......so on and so on.....actually I think I would consult a law professor at a local university to get a 3rd or 4th year student to write the proper language for you......could help them with a class and also help you by saving tons of money.
Great thread, I've learned a lot from reading it, don't know if my stuff is good enough to steal but I watermark it anyway. Appreciate all the info that's floating around in here.
Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering. I sense much fear in you. -Yoda
Ugh Seymore, what a nasty situation. It occurred to me that your friend may have been violating that oh-so-lovely DMCA also in that he was circumventing a protection system (right-click protection). I wonder if theory holds any water... any legal experts? Even if it doesn't, he's stretching the law for his purposes - it could lend you a bit of ammo if he harasses you any more
Thanks for the fascinating thread Seymore. Lots of good information from a real-world experience.
As I read the various wordy paragraphs from "Aaron" I had a thought: Except for admitting that publishing your image would have been wrong, he never really seems to admit that taking it was wrong in the first place - and then goes as far as to try and compare speeding with rape (what a stretch). I wonder how he would feel if we started comparing his "borrowing" of an image for his own use to downloading copyrighted music for his own use. If he was caught with thousands of .mp3s on his PC I don't think he could get away with crying "fair use" - and I further doubt he'd have much luck suing the hundreds of news outlets who would report that he was stealing music.
From my zillion years in the stock photo licensing biz...everyone who has "borrowed/stole/fair used to death,etc" my images will turn into a major sociopath and turn the WHOLE freaking situation around and blame the photographer for being wrong in some regard.
Watermarks are always a good idea.It's amazing that people steal 4x6 web size images and resell them onto CD's,upload them to stock photo sites and pretend it is their image to sell it or put them on ebay and sell them as 4x6 prints and have a lab print them.
Legalese all over a site and watermarks are my best and only defense at this time.
I was in Costco yesterday and walked by the photo lab and saw a little display with a folded brochure that said "What you need to know about Copyright Law and Photography". A couple interesting quotes from inside that relate to this thread...
Under Did you Know?
You can be personally liable for copyright infringement even if you did not intend to break the law. Good intentions are not a defense for copyright infringement.
Just because a photograph is on the Internet does not mean it is in the public domain.
Purchasing prints of a photo, CD or DVD from a professional photographer or studio does not transfer the copyright of the photo to you, and the photo cannot be reproduced without a release.
"A photo is like a hamburger. You can get one from McDonalds for $1, one from Chili's for $5, or one from Ruth's Chris for $15. You usually get what you pay for, but don't expect a Ruth's Chris burger at a McDonalds price, if you want that, go cook it yourself." - me
Legalese all over a site and watermarks are my best and only defense at this time.
I have sued infringers and I have won
itsme!
A lawyer's view on the importance of watermarks... as she says at the end, you don't have to have registered your photo in advance to recover under the statute she discusses.
Comments
My wife has a saying that the "brain fairy" usually shows up about the age of 2 in dogs...
...and 30 in humans!
:lol4:lol4:lol4
That's great! I'm going to have to remember that one. Unfortunately, it seems many people by 30 have developed just enough instinct to hide from that fairy.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
Because it appears to me there are hours worth of effort devoted here to this pointless issue.
Is $20 worth this much effort? For an image that's probably 4"x6" at screen res? Better to just ask for a by line and be done with it. Generosity will earn you far more in the long run. No, I didn't read all 50 responses, I lost interest after 3 due to the sheer banality of trying to own something that exists in cyberspace. The actual harm here is nil & the only folks agonizing over copyright on such a small scale are the wannabe waneabe pros shooting little league games. People, wake up and realize you've got better things to worry about. Go kiss your spouse and tell your kids you love them, go blow some bubbles, or, better yet, make some new work that you love.
As the wise man one said: pick your battles.
Just my $.02.
Jake: Hit it.
http://www.sissonphotography.com
www.flickr.com/photos/sissonphotography
http://sissonphotography.blogspot.com/
IMPO it has nothing to do with "What is 20 minutes of you life worth?" but more towards the ethics of the matter, the principles involved and the precedence this example sets for all who have to deal with me now and in the future. I, personally, will not tolerate it.
ADDITION: I kiss my DW and kids multiple times a day. For these wonders I am truly grateful.
Johnny, You're probably right. Hey I checked out your site. Really beautiful shots and I like the way you designed the presentation also.
BTW - I've taken a copy of your shot of Manarola, Italy. It will be perfect for a campaign I'm working on for Starbucks. Thanks.
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
Hey that's great, Angelo. Can you email me a copy so that I can include Italy with our school's international day postcard sets we are printing and selling?
GreyLeaf PhotoGraphy
Sure! See anything else you might need? I'm thinking of going back for seconds myself.
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
GreyLeaf PhotoGraphy
Actually, I really do understand what you mean about the principle of the matter. I just think there a point to which people become obsessed with this issue. Having your stuff out there on the web & in the world for people to see means giving up some control. I think to a certain extent we just need to accept that & worry about the things that really matter, like working on our craft.
Jake: Hit it.
http://www.sissonphotography.com
www.flickr.com/photos/sissonphotography
http://sissonphotography.blogspot.com/
Glad you like! I just realized I had 'Protected: Yes' set in my customization, but I've set to 'Protected: No' so you can download the larges now. Ok, so now that you've got them, take a look at this link about printing and resolution:
http://www.mmprint.com/highres_photos.cfm
See, the Large you've downloaded will be less than 1.5" x 2" when you try to print it on those coffee cups and postcards. You need 300dpi at final size for that. 200dpi will give you a decent inkjet print, but you're talking about an image that will be 3" x 2".
This is what I'm talking about. Sure, you can use it on the web, plenty of rez there, but not in print. I couldn't care less about how it gets used on the web because it's cyberspace. The only people making money selling access to screen rez images in cyberspace are porn sites.
My full rez originals are NOT available for download because those could actually be reproduced photographically or in offset litho.
So, if you want the Manarola shot @ 300dpi so you can print it, let me know, I'll make you a great deal! $20 should be enough to compensate me the time I spent sharing this enjoyable conversation about resolution with y'all.
Jake: Hit it.
http://www.sissonphotography.com
www.flickr.com/photos/sissonphotography
http://sissonphotography.blogspot.com/
All joking aside... of course I took nothing from your site but you can't be so ignorant of the potential of your images to think that low-res shots aren't valuable and entirely usable by companies launching commercial websites every day.
Half of my photo purchases, as a creative director, are for web use. I've paid as much as $3500 for a low-res, small scale image with limited use, so I have no idea how you equate our discussion with porn sites.
While you may think a thread like this is a waste of time, I rather take the position of helping to protect others, particularly newcombers to the business, from repeating mistakes.
Now, what if I were working on a website or an email based ad campaign for, oh let's say Intercontinental Hotels and I came across your site and liked the images and decided they fit the theme of my project and just took them?
Would you feel differently?
You see, this business is not just about selling prints and coffee mugs. It's about creating compelling images that have value, both artistically and commercially.
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
Actually, I really do know what you mean, and this forum isn't a waste of time in the slightest. In fact, I had a copyright issue this week with an artist I work with. We agreed on a simple usage statement and it further depened our valuable professional relationship.
It's just hard seeing folks get so worked up over 'infringement issues' when it's something very small scale that is impossible to prosecute unless you're able to afford lenghty litigation. A bit of generosity will often reap much larger rewards and help to develop relationships with clients.
Angelo, If you see something on my site that so outstanding that you need it I say go for it. I assume my images will be used in this way because my site is public. A photo credit would be great if you're inclined to include it. I figure you'll contact me if you need the hi-rez for something that's going to be published.
I just think there needs to be a logical balance, especially when it comes to low-resolution images. Generosity is also something that newcomers to the business need to understand. Your best work will come from referrals, and you get those by being the type of person that people want to work with.
So the conversation here is indeed appreciated!
Jake: Hit it.
http://www.sissonphotography.com
www.flickr.com/photos/sissonphotography
http://sissonphotography.blogspot.com/
Angelo -
hmmm, I doubt these are worth that much, but i'll take half that
But I do have more...
-Fleetwood Mac
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
While I do not like slippery slope arguments as a general rule sometimes the slippery slope is very real. Protect your rights as often as you can and don't be tempted to let something slide just because the infraction is minor.
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
The copyright agreement was really simple. It says that I retain copyright and the artist has unlimited use of the images but excludes resale in any form. This gives the artist the freedom of use he's looking for while protecting my copyright, so everyone's happy.
I was paid up-front for the shooting and processing and supplied a disk. The copyright agreement and attribution statement were included on the disk with the images.
Hope that helps.
Jake: Hit it.
http://www.sissonphotography.com
www.flickr.com/photos/sissonphotography
http://sissonphotography.blogspot.com/
http://www.ronseymour.com/
Jake: Hit it.
http://www.sissonphotography.com
www.flickr.com/photos/sissonphotography
http://sissonphotography.blogspot.com/
you'll find that and other resources here: http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=62387
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
How about faxing your aggrements and having them signed and faxed/mailed back to you?
It is my understanding from researching the government's website that there's a difference between a copyright statement and a copyright agreement. That website (included in Angelo's thread) is particularly helpful on the details.
The Ron Seymore site is an interesting approach but it makes me nervous about even clicking through to the pix! Fortunately his work is pretty amazing. But definitely this approach is an option to consider.
Jake: Hit it.
http://www.sissonphotography.com
www.flickr.com/photos/sissonphotography
http://sissonphotography.blogspot.com/
Jake: Hit it.
http://www.sissonphotography.com
www.flickr.com/photos/sissonphotography
http://sissonphotography.blogspot.com/
More info: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00001201----000-.html
As I read the various wordy paragraphs from "Aaron" I had a thought: Except for admitting that publishing your image would have been wrong, he never really seems to admit that taking it was wrong in the first place - and then goes as far as to try and compare speeding with rape (what a stretch). I wonder how he would feel if we started comparing his "borrowing" of an image for his own use to downloading copyrighted music for his own use. If he was caught with thousands of .mp3s on his PC I don't think he could get away with crying "fair use" - and I further doubt he'd have much luck suing the hundreds of news outlets who would report that he was stealing music.
+1 for that! And, the abuser always blames the victim.
http://midnightblue.smugmug.com
Canon
Watermarks are always a good idea.It's amazing that people steal 4x6 web size images and resell them onto CD's,upload them to stock photo sites and pretend it is their image to sell it or put them on ebay and sell them as 4x6 prints and have a lab print them.
Legalese all over a site and watermarks are my best and only defense at this time.
I have sued infringers and I have won
itsme!
Under Did you Know?
You can be personally liable for copyright infringement even if you did not intend to break the law. Good intentions are not a defense for copyright infringement.
Just because a photograph is on the Internet does not mean it is in the public domain.
Purchasing prints of a photo, CD or DVD from a professional photographer or studio does not transfer the copyright of the photo to you, and the photo cannot be reproduced without a release.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/