It sounds that if you the pics and a list of participants and their name then you could tag the pic with their last name and then if someone searched your site by the last name you would be violating the patent.
Is that correct cabbey?
Just in half interested bystander.
The participants would need to be wearing signs with their last names.
It would have to be a sporting event.
Disclaimer: I am not a patent attorney.
Process for providing event photographs for inspection, selection and distribution via a computer network.
I've merged these two threads, so your post, Nik is now in the thread that was started earlier.
Actually, if I remember correctly, you standing on the side of the street snapping photos and manually identifying the participants and selling them photos (even from a web site) would not violate his patent. His patent is based on the automation of the entire process (timing, etc.) to identify participants without relying on purely visual processes.
But then again, I'm not a lawyer. I don't even play one on TV.
If you intend to sell your work and have, in any way, associated your images with any bib#, jersey number, name or any other easily identifiable pieces of information (obviously a must for people doing mass shooting and putting up their work on the web in hope somebody would buy it), you *are* in violation of this patent. In my case - dozen pictures, no names , no tags, etc. - it really does not matter. But for a (semi-)pro who, for instance, shoots high school/college sports - it's a stab in the back...
Mike Lane wrote:
Microsoft Patents Ones, Zeros
Oky Doky.............I have looked at this patent, and truly believe a first year law student could eliminate 90% of it. It's shear nonsense!
I did go to this guys photo event site, and from what I saw his only hope of making any money in photography is to bully the unsuspecting, and gullible into paying some outrageous license fee.
I don't do, or have any thoughts of photographing any events for money, but if I do, I will not hesitate to post the photos for sale, or viewing online. Actually I think he is claiming any distribution at all on the internet, even if no money is involved is a violation of his not very original idea to offer photos on the internet.
Please let us know if he sends you a cease and desist order. I would be very interested to see the exact wording.
Oh and how about a look at one of the photos you took at the event?
Mike Lane wrote:
Someone's got a site covering the latest on this issue.
Once again, I hope the common sense will rule, and this "patented approach" will not ruin anybody's life or business...
A process... associating identifying data with each photograph taken, wherein the identifying data is selected from at least one of: a number corresponding to a number worn by a participant, a participant's name, a code acquired from a component worn by a participant, and a date and time, including hour and minute the photograph was taken;
You're correct, in fact.
I looked at his website, pictures shot at the same spot at the same time I was there (Amgen Nike Race 25 Feb).
Well, considering he had 4 cameras set at fixed angle, all the settings on manual, triggered with his sensors and prolly in jpeg mode - no wonder he got way more pictures than I did all by me lonesome.
Are they better? They might be, but it's *really* hard to say. With all his patents it's really hard to see the level of the details on those tiny thumbnails.
Would I buy my own picture from there? I highly doubt it..
And his website itself... Seriously, I would consider spending some efforts on the web-design and less on the patenting BS if I were in his shoes. But.. oh well, every man to his taste...
Sam, my post about this event is here: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=28803
Also there is a link to the gallery.
Thanks for the fresh look!
I went and took another look at what this inept photographer / buisiness wanabe calls a website. I can't believe my eyes! I saw photo after photo of cars, motorcylels, emergency vehicles, city trucks, and oh yeah a couple of bicycles. The photos are so small I can't judge the quality at all. If he sells one photo I will be amazed.
But there lies the rub. He isn't interested in selling photos. His business model is to force other to pay him to take photos.
Be aware he has other patents pending. I think one of them is a patent on light. So if you capture, or use light in any way, you will need to be licensed.
My plan is to take whatever photos I want and share them with whoever I want.
It doesn't say automated process, it just says process. To me, that means that the process could be a human looking at photos, matching jersey or bib numbers with a team roster or other printed reference list, and typing the athlete's name into the photo's EXIF data.
(yea, like people haven't been hand-comparing photos to rosters for ages)
I understand correctly the summary's not what gets brought up in court - the claims are.
Well, what do you know - I did receive a letter...
However, it was not "C&D" we were talking about .
On the opposite, it was rather kind and open. He said he has read all our rather heated discussion here and made an invitation for me and DavidTO (the two people are known to live nearby) to meet and talk, in a more relaxed and professional manner. Since we all live in the same town - I don't think it would hurt to have a chat and some .:):
David, let me know if you're interested. I'm open pretty much all the evenings after 6 pm (except this coming Friday)...
I hope you do go and talk to him. It would be interesting to hear exactly in his own words what he laying claim to.
take a tape recorder
I would counsel against taking a tape recorder. Legal issues aside, just approch him staight up, and talk.
You, we may not agree with his stance, but we can learn more about the person, clarify his position , and see where he is comming from. If he's nuts, so be it, but there is nothing to gain by tape recording him. This is just a conversation.
Good luck Nikolai