DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> Who has ownership of the images here?
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 74 of 74, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 04/07/2005 06:28:26 PM · #51
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by karmat:
I'm just echoing mk. I do not have to download the originals. I'm on dialup -- can you imagine me trying to get some of ya'lls HUGE files. When there is a question of if an effect *could* be achieved, I usually open the originals thumbnail to work on. then, it is deleted.


That's an interesting tangent. Am I to understand from this that sometimes the site council will attempt to REPLICATE an editing effect to determine if indeed this paricular image could have been made in that particular way? That must be an interesting use of time :-)

I've often considered the amount of editing tips the SC must be privvy to. In fact I'm far more concerned about them getting hold of my top secret editing methods than my full size originals.

Or I would be if I had any top secret editing methods :D
 04/07/2005 06:29:57 PM · #52
Ok.. honestly people.. if you're *THAT* worried that the SC is going to suddenly (after 3 years of honest and upstanding behavior) start hoarding your originals and trying to rip you off in some way, then it's very simple. Stop.. submitting.. to challenges.

It's that simple. The majority of people on this site either a: know full well what the TOS says, honor it, and are confident in the owners and SC to take care of their rights, or b: Didn't know about this particular thing, have now been enlightened, and still have confidence and trust in the owners and SC.

There's nothing to be gained by trying to make everyone's life more difficult by demanding originals be resized, or wiped out, or code written, or any other suggestion that has been offered.. only to appease such a small minority.

Paranoia doesn't help anyone.
 04/07/2005 06:38:27 PM · #53
Originally posted by Artyste:
...only to appease such a small minority.


That's the problem. When someone "in the minority" asks a question or makes a suggestion, they are immediately wrong and don't warrant an answer. I asked a question and made a suggestion. I'm not asking you to like it.

I read the TOS and FAQ. The above wasn't, and isn't, in there. I've asked that it be added. If I had known, I wouldn't have submitted. I don't plan to submit again and I don't plan to renew my membership for access to the challenges again. No big deal.


04/07/2005 06:43:23 PM · #54
It amuses me how much more we worry about this, now that everyone and their brother can afford a DSLR, than we did when the best camera here was a Dimage or a G5...

Seems now everyone thinks their images are worth $5000, or something.

Seriously, folks, if your images are good enough that the UNPROCESSED original being in the hands of anyone other than yourself scares you to death, please do not submit them here. Please do not submit them to Kodak POTD, or even post them on pbase. Please make sure you read the user agreement carefully at any online labs you use for printing to make sure that NO ONE can view that image on the internet in any fashion. I suspect that if an image Bryan Peterson creates shows up ANYWHERE in ANY resolution, he is SUPPOSED to get paid. If any of us are "good" enough to merit that kind of attention, we really should not be wasting our talent on an online photography challenge. Dr. Jones, for instance, probably NEVER shows us his best work, yet many of you regard it VERY highly. His best work puts food on his table - he's not going to "waste" it here. (My opinion, I do not know this for a fact.)

I'm not trying to be a smarty pants, seriously. I think the issue here is that MANY of us have improved, our equipment has improved, and our WORK has improved to the point where we think our images are worth MUCH more than we once thought they were. That may or may not be true, but let's assume it is. If our images are REALLY worth what WE think they are, we need to find a marketing source and MARKET those images. If we market them, we should not decrease their worth by making ANY version (even 640x480) available on the web for the 10000 users of DPC to view at their leisure.

In the event, though, that you wish to participate in a CONTEST, please do so. However, please do so with images that you are willing to compromise the value of based on them being available to the viewing public at absolutely NO charge.

Can you see my point? Since the value of your photo is probably decreased anyway because it is so readily available on the web, the potential value in the UNPROCESSED original is virtually NOTHING. I realize that some of you believe that being able to print a high res print makes a file worth more than a low res, but the real value in any photo is its EXCLUSIVITY. Nike will not pay me $10000 for a picture of a Nike logo on an Air Jordan, but if Michael is wearing it, they probably paid him $50000 and the photog another $2000. Supply and demand.

I do think a little paranoia is raining down and some of you are overreacting. There are literally THOUSANDS of images on this site, and the TOS restrict the site owners - regardless of who they are - to only using your images to promote the site. Site council is also bound by those restrictions, as is everyone who signs up as a member. I am not legally allowed to "steal" an image from the site and have it printed.

The Terms of Service are basically a legal document. Revamping them would require the services of an attorney. Drew and Langdon use an attorney regularly in the course of their business, and the clauses of concern have already been discussed. Changing the terms of service would effectively require that EVERY site member's membership be temporarily revoked until they log in and agree to the NEW TOS. I don't personally believe that enough of us feel that the current TOS are insufficient protection to make this a necessity.

It's not as easy as it seems, sometimes. :)
 04/07/2005 06:50:34 PM · #55
Originally posted by ButterflySis:
Originally posted by Artyste:
...only to appease such a small minority.


That's the problem. When someone "in the minority" asks a question or makes a suggestion, they are immediately wrong and don't warrant an answer. I asked a question and made a suggestion. I'm not asking you to like it.


Umm.. nobody said you were *wrong*.. and every question has been answered on this thread to the fullest ability of the SC.. and they probably will continue to answer the questions. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying that with an entity like DPC, the few do not outweigh the many, and if DPC were to go changing things and adding things every single time 3 or 4 people made a fuss about it, it'd be chaos. I guess I simply don't understand your fears, and I'm sorry you feel strongly enough that you feel you need to withdraw submissions and your membership, but my feelings stand..

If someone really feels that their work is being compromised or is in danger of being misused here, and that fear has been, in my mind, adequately addressed by those in charge, then there's only one thing left to do.. stop participating.
04/07/2005 06:59:18 PM · #56
Good post Bernard. I agree with you 100%. People have to remember that if you don't want it stolen then don't show it to anyone. Not that I would do it but if it is on any webpage it can be stolen regardless of size. Also not implying that the admins or site council is stealing them. Just making a point and hoping this thread will soon disappear. I enjoy this site and the many friends I have mode from becoming a member. Also enjoy the fact that I have learned so much from the people here. If you go because of this then that is your decision. I plan on being here awhile and submitting to challenges.
 04/07/2005 07:18:34 PM · #57
Originally posted by Artyste:
Umm.. nobody said you were *wrong*.. and every question has been answered on this thread to the fullest ability of the SC.. and they probably will continue to answer the questions. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying that with an entity like DPC, the few do not outweigh the many, and if DPC were to go changing things and adding things every single time 3 or 4 people made a fuss about it, it'd be chaos. I guess I simply don't understand your fears, and I'm sorry you feel strongly enough that you feel you need to withdraw submissions and your membership, but my feelings stand..

If someone really feels that their work is being compromised or is in danger of being misused here, and that fear has been, in my mind, adequately addressed by those in charge, then there's only one thing left to do.. stop participating.


Yes, my questions are being answered, and I thanked Terry for doing so. You implied I was trying to make things difficult. I am not. If that, or any sarcasm, was read into my posts, I'm sorry, but that is not the tone I was writing in. I'm just curious why they store the originals. They can (and will) do what they want. I just wish I knew ahead of time. I joined for the challenges. It's partly my fault for not asking sooner. I'm not saying your thoughts are wrong, either. I'm just trying to figure out why something is so. If it were different I would consider entering again. As you can see, since learning of this several months ago, I have not entered (like you suggested). I didn't throw a fit about it and am not now. I'm only discussing it because this thread was started and I want people to be aware of what I wasn't. I don't care about the challenges; I can live without them. I read the forums and enjoy looking at the images and commenting on them. I don't plan on leaving the site, just not joining again.

Jen
 04/07/2005 07:51:15 PM · #58
I'd like to post an opinion that is purely personal, and does not reflect my position on the Site Council:
First, let me say that I trust DPC with the safekeeping of any originals I provide. The site ToS does not provide for any use of the originals other than for verification of entry validity. I recognize that it would be a significant task to resize originals, since they come in so many formats (think about all the mutually-incomaptible RAW formats) and thus they cannot be processed automatically. In addition, any processing usually affects EXIF information.
If I have images that I believe have significant commercial value, I may choose not to submit those images to challenges. So far, this has not been a concern, but it may become one. I believe, however, that if I were to sell exclusive rights to an image, that I could word the contract such that previously-granted rights for web use of the image are allowed. While this might slightly affect the price I might receive, I feel the effect would be minor.
In short, I feel that the benefits I've received here at DPC in the form of personal growth as a photographer far, far outweigh any costs that I might have incurred in *possible* lost income as a result of submitting an image to a challenge. Not to mention the exposure I get by having my images displayed here on DPC.
I can honestly say that when I joined DPC in June of 2002, I was a rank amateur, and it showed in my work. I joined in order to improve the artistic side of my photography, and my my investment of time and modest financial investment in DPC has paid back in spades. You don't have to look far at all to find folks who began here as inexperienced amateurs who are now selling images regularly. It's very likely that 5 years hence we will find a number of highly-ranked pro photogs that got their "leg up" here at DPC.
I may be coming on a little strong, but I do feel very strongly in the benefits of this site to the members, and it greatly pains me to see members post that they will not submit or renew because of the perceived issues. I hope those members will forgive me if I say that I believe this to be wrong-headed; again, this is a statement of my own opinion.
I'll close this ramble by restating my commitment to the success of this site, which I consider to be the "best of the best" on the 'net for improving one's photography.
04/07/2005 08:03:40 PM · #59
Originally posted by nards656:

The Terms of Service are basically a legal document. Revamping them would require the services of an attorney. Drew and Langdon use an attorney regularly in the course of their business, and the clauses of concern have already been discussed. Changing the terms of service would effectively require that EVERY site member's membership be temporarily revoked until they log in and agree to the NEW TOS. I don't personally believe that enough of us feel that the current TOS are insufficient protection to make this a necessity.

It's not as easy as it seems, sometimes. :)


That is what a thread like this is about making people aware.

edit for my short sightness

Message edited by author 2005-04-07 20:09:47.
 04/07/2005 08:18:19 PM · #60
First, I wanna say that I did not read everything in this post... simply because I just don't like the general idea that is convey here.

I always loved photography since I was 12, I bought my first (and only) 35mm camera at 14, a Minolta XG-7, my dad had to sign at the bank so I could borrow the money to buy it.

As you can imagine, I was not rich, and still not. I had and used this camera for 22 years. I had to limit my use of it because of the cost of film and develloping.

I discovered digital camera a few years ago, and recently was able to buy a Panasonic DMC FZ-20 (considered by many as the P&S camera that is closest to a DSLR) If one day I can afford a DSLR, I will do the move for sure.

After buying this camera I discovered DPReview and then DPChallenge. I'm hooked to this site. I did read many thread about people selling their picture on stock sites, tried it, and realized very fast that this was not for me. I'm not a Pro. All I want and enjoy is to have a challenge, have people having a look and vote on my photos, and get constructive critiques.

All that said, what I mean is that this is by far the best WEB site I ever came accros and I'm not afraid of what might happen to any of my submissions. And if you think that your pictures are in danger to if you post them here and it might prevent you of making thousands of dollars, then just don't submit them.

As a last note, forgive me for all the mistakes in the text... English is not my Mother Tongue.


Message edited by author 2005-04-07 20:20:42.
 04/07/2005 08:20:15 PM · #61
Jen you put your pictures up on smugmug right? Who's to say anyone can't go there and steal them anyway. I think the questions as to why they keep the original was answered when Terry(I think) stated that the decision of site coucil was almost to DQ a recent entry until he brought up the decision of an earlier challenge where this was allowed and it changed the minds of everyone. So this photographer has benefitted from the fact that they keep the originals. I don't think they are going to keep your originals to profit from them. It doesn't say that in my mind. It says to use in the promotion of this site. Would you mind if they used one of your shots for promoting a site that you are a part of and until this was probably proud to be a part of?
 04/07/2005 08:32:59 PM · #62
Originally posted by Artyste:
... and every question has been answered on this thread to the fullest ability of the SC.. and they probably will continue to answer the questions. ...

Actually, not all questions have been answered -- but it is a trivial thing, and certainly not one I am overly concerned about. I asked earlier for a clarification of the the rights granted by this sentence in the UA, (the one causing all the fuss):

6.2 You hereby grant DPChallenge.com a nonexclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicensable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise any rights you have in the Member Information and Media, and otherwise to make use of the Member Information and Media (including publishing, disseminating, broadcasting, manipulating, reproducing, editing, translating, performing, modifying, or displaying any part of the Member Information) and/or Media alone or as part of other work in any form, media, or technology whether now new known or hereafter developed, to enable DPChallenge.com to continue the specific operation or marketing of the site.

Specifically, and strictly as a matter of curiousity, does the single right granted (i.e. - to exercise any rights the user has) change if the users rights change after the agreement has been made?

Furthermore, if the right granted does not change -- when is it applied, when the user agreed to the UA for all future submissions or at the time that specific item was submitted?

Again, my interest in this is strictly one of curiosity -- as I am not familiar with the exact legal cpmtext of the very specific wording.

David
 04/07/2005 08:54:17 PM · #63
Originally posted by Britannica:
...Specifically, and strictly as a matter of curiousity, does the single right granted (i.e. - to exercise any rights the user has) change if the users rights change after the agreement has been made?


Offhand, the way this is worded, I would say "no." I believe that the user's rights in force at the time of submission would be what is important here. I must stress that this is not a legal opinion.

Originally posted by Britannica:
...Furthermore, if the right granted does not change -- when is it applied, when the user agreed to the UA for all future submissions or at the time that specific item was submitted?


It seems like it must be applied for each submission. It doesn't seem to make sense that an agreement can take place for something not yet submitted. By submitting an image, you would agree, for that image, to grant the right set forth the in the UA. Again, not a legal opinion, just my interpretation.


04/07/2005 09:12:12 PM · #64
My opinion?

If you are having such a hard time with this, DON'T submit pictures to the challenges.
It leaves us who are here to improve our work more chances at getting a ribbon. Plus those of us who are here to improve ourelves aren't hyper about anyone stealing our work.
So, Please, lighten up, this site seems to be to enjoy our work and improve ourselves by using the challenges and if you are so protective of your work keep it on your hard drive and don't submit it. That solves the problem of anyone else other than you having your pictures
 04/07/2005 09:13:28 PM · #65
Originally posted by kirbic:
I'd like to post an opinion that is purely personal, and does not reflect my position on the Site Council:
First, let me say that I trust DPC with the safekeeping of any originals I provide. The site ToS does not provide for any use of the originals other than for verification of entry validity. I recognize that it would be a significant task to resize originals, since they come in so many formats (think about all the mutually-incomaptible RAW formats) and thus they cannot be processed automatically. In addition, any processing usually affects EXIF information.
If I have images that I believe have significant commercial value, I may choose not to submit those images to challenges. So far, this has not been a concern, but it may become one. I believe, however, that if I were to sell exclusive rights to an image, that I could word the contract such that previously-granted rights for web use of the image are allowed. While this might slightly affect the price I might receive, I feel the effect would be minor.
In short, I feel that the benefits I've received here at DPC in the form of personal growth as a photographer far, far outweigh any costs that I might have incurred in *possible* lost income as a result of submitting an image to a challenge. Not to mention the exposure I get by having my images displayed here on DPC.
I can honestly say that when I joined DPC in June of 2002, I was a rank amateur, and it showed in my work. I joined in order to improve the artistic side of my photography, and my my investment of time and modest financial investment in DPC has paid back in spades. You don't have to look far at all to find folks who began here as inexperienced amateurs who are now selling images regularly. It's very likely that 5 years hence we will find a number of highly-ranked pro photogs that got their "leg up" here at DPC.
I may be coming on a little strong, but I do feel very strongly in the benefits of this site to the members, and it greatly pains me to see members post that they will not submit or renew because of the perceived issues. I hope those members will forgive me if I say that I believe this to be wrong-headed; again, this is a statement of my own opinion.
I'll close this ramble by restating my commitment to the success of this site, which I consider to be the "best of the best" on the 'net for improving one's photography.


Fritz, you know I respect your opinion and you've been friendly and helpful to me in the past. I only asked (what I thought was) a simple question. It somehow has gotten twisted into other meanings so let me clarify. I never said the site was worthless, not a good learning environment, etc, etc. I only said I signed up for the challenges...not the portfolio space, and the other options (although they are nice additions). Since I no longer want to participate in member challenges, I'm not going to re-up. That's all I said. I agree with you, that this is a terrific site and learning environment. Just because I choose not to submit to challenges doesn't mean I'm "wrong-headed" and will no longer learn. A lot of people choose not to enter. The only difference is our reasons why.

Jen

Originally posted by rex07734:
Jen you put your pictures up on smugmug right? Who's to say anyone can't go there and steal them anyway. I think the questions as to why they keep the original was answered when Terry(I think) stated that the decision of site coucil was almost to DQ a recent entry until he brought up the decision of an earlier challenge where this was allowed and it changed the minds of everyone. So this photographer has benefitted from the fact that they keep the originals. I don't think they are going to keep your originals to profit from them. It doesn't say that in my mind. It says to use in the promotion of this site. Would you mind if they used one of your shots for promoting a site that you are a part of and until this was probably proud to be a part of?


James, yes I post small resolution images on Smugmug. I realize I need to start watermarking my images (at least my better ones) and hope to get to it within the next few months while also designing a better web site. I don't, however, post full-size, easily printable images. While I don't love the idea of sharing my originals, I can understand why they want to see them. What I dislike more is that they are kept, forever, go through many hands, and I wasn't aware. This has been beaten to death though. I just asked a question. Didn't mean to get everyone hyper over it. I'm certainly not hyper over it.

Jen
 04/07/2005 09:14:58 PM · #66
My opinion?

If you are having such a hard time with this, DON'T submit pictures to the challenges.
It leaves us who are here to improve our work more chances at getting a ribbon. Plus those of us who are here to improve ourelves aren't hyper about anyone stealing our work.
So, Please, lighten up, this site seems to be to enjoy our work and improve ourselves by using the challenges and if you are so protective of your work keep it on your hard drive and don't submit it. That solves the problem of anyone else other than you having your pictures
 04/07/2005 09:25:52 PM · #67
Oh piffle.
 04/07/2005 09:45:02 PM · #68
I believe it is against the law for anyone even DPC to print or use a full sized original without the photographers consent!If it isn`t this way on this site,then I think that something is wrong! Giving DPC the full right to the actual enrty I have no problem with.

Message edited by author 2005-04-07 21:55:16.
 04/07/2005 09:48:32 PM · #69
Originally posted by Dim7:
I believe it is against the law for anyone even DPC to print or use a full sized original without the photographers consent!


I don't know is it ?
 04/07/2005 09:57:15 PM · #70
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by Dim7:
I believe it is against the law for anyone even DPC to print or use a full sized original without the photographers consent!


I don't know is it ?

It appears this may not be so! It certainly has me thinking!

Message edited by author 2005-04-07 21:57:30.
 04/07/2005 10:44:44 PM · #71
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by Dim7:
I believe it is against the law for anyone even DPC to print or use a full sized original without the photographers consent!


I don't know is it ?


It is. By agreeing to the Terms of Use, you do grant consent to use the image, but only for the specific operation and marketing of the site. It does not entitle DPChallenge or anyone to use the image for any other purpose.

-Terry
 04/07/2005 11:32:01 PM · #72
Originally posted by bod:
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by karmat:
I'm just echoing mk. I do not have to download the originals. I'm on dialup -- can you imagine me trying to get some of ya'lls HUGE files. When there is a question of if an effect *could* be achieved, I usually open the originals thumbnail to work on. then, it is deleted.


That's an interesting tangent. Am I to understand from this that sometimes the site council will attempt to REPLICATE an editing effect to determine if indeed this paricular image could have been made in that particular way? That must be an interesting use of time :-)

I've often considered the amount of editing tips the SC must be privvy to. In fact I'm far more concerned about them getting hold of my top secret editing methods than my full size originals.

Or I would be if I had any top secret editing methods :D


obviously. haha. dosn't seem to have helped me, though i do confess that i've learned alot
 04/08/2005 02:01:10 AM · #73
Just a few quick points I want to make. Rather than reply to each individual post, this is a "summary reply" intended to respond to most of the questions to this point. As always, Drew and/or Langdon have the right to correct or contradict me.

Originally posted by keegbow:
You have made some valid points regarding images that have had DQ raised against them but you neglected to mention the original images of the top 5 place getters that are required to have the Exif data checked.

Surely after these images are verified they could be returned.


I assume by "returned" you mean "deleted." Though this could be done, a very high percentage of the top-5 images are images with precedent value from a rules standpoint. As I pointed out, sometimes that precident value does not become apparent until months or even years later (witness the example I referred to from Challenge 17). It also fails to address the need to have known-good originals on file for comparison in cases where we suspect EXIF tampering.

Originally posted by keegbow:
You also mentioned how site council come and go and it seems have access to these images and presumably they have downloaded these images ( as I'm not privy to the exact process I stand corrected if this is not so) on their HDD for review it is then possible and agreed to by us in the terms and conditions these images end up on other peoples computers who no longer have anything to do with the site.


You are correct, but deleting originals from the site would not help with that. In most cases we do not download the originals (yes, I'm ignoring the purely semantic argument that images are technically downloaded to a cache when they are viewed online) but rather view them through the site's interface. In cases where we do download the originals, it is almost always at the time of validation, when the originals would have to be available anyway. If I download an image at that time, deleting the image from the site will not change the fact that I downloaded it. In other words, deleting the images after validation does not prevent Site Council download of the originals -- and realistically, if some rogue Site Council member were to look to build up a collection of originals, wouldn't it be most practical to do so over time, as they were downloaded? Given that, deleting originals after validation would eliminate all of the beneficial aspects of retaining the originals, but do almost nothing to eliminate any of the perceived risks.

The recent surrealism challenge had a place getter DQ for not submitting his original after voting. This member appeared to be a professional photographer and possibly not to keen to share his work.

Davenit's decision not to submit his original had nothing to do with protecion of the file. Dave took issue with our interpretation of the editing rules with regard to Nightbulb, and as a result opted not to submit his proof and to discontinue participation in future challenges. It's also funny how things tie together -- I *think* it was the discussion of whether to validate Nightbulb which led me to dig up the validation of Eye Variations from June 2002.

Originally posted by keegbow:
As mentioned before I'm not about being an alarmist it is just that as members we all should read the fine print and I'm certainly not going to stop entering challenges but if by the odd chance I had a top 5 image I would seriously consider not sending my orignal.


If you are not comfortable submitting your originals, then it may be best not to enter challenges. As there is a checkbox on the submission page that states "If requested, I will provide the unedited, original file from my digital camera within 48 hours," refusal to submit an original might be considered a willful violation of the rules and subject to additional action.

Originally posted by bear_music:
That's an interesting tangent. Am I to understand from this that sometimes the site council will attempt to REPLICATE an editing effect to determine if indeed this paricular image could have been made in that particular way? That must be an interesting use of time :-)


Yes, we occasionally engage in this activity, which I like to call "Forensic Photoshop." This is typically done in cases where there is subsantial but not conclusive doubt as to whether an entry could have been achieved legally. It is relatively rare that we need to go to that extent to prove out a decision.

Originally posted by ButterflySis:
Thanks for replying, Terry. I understand the reasons for asking for originals, but I still don't understand why they need to be kept indefinitely.


Again, see my reference to the entry from June 2002 which was key in validating a recent entry. Without that on file, the photographer might have been disqualified.

Originally posted by ButterflySis:
Imo, the owners are the only ones that should have access to our originals.


That's simply impractical. In late 2002, the volume of DQ requests became too much for Drew and Langdon to deal with, and this responsibility was delegated to Site Council. For conext, the In The Beginning and Cemetery challenges produced a total of 32 DQ requests. This is simply too much for Drew and Langdon to deal with on any kind of a consistent basis.

Originally posted by ButterflySis:
Why can't the originals be resized to 640px on the longest side and then the originals be deleted. Better yet, write some code that would do it for you. Then no one would have the full size original. Seems like a 640px would serve the purpose without full-size originals floating around all over the place.


Off the top of my head:
1. There is no reliable way to do this without altering, corrupting or losing the EXIF data. It is critical that the EXIF be kept intact, as that information is critical to do our jobs.
2. There is no way to do this for RAW images. The majority of top-5 entries are shot in RAW. Conversion to JPEG is not acceptable as we sometimes need to be able to duplicate the photographer's RAW conversion steps.
3. Even if we were to convert RAW image files, the formats are constantly evolving. We would need to not only write a file utility that could convert RAW files (a feat in itself, and I don't think this is within the scope of the Administrators' technical knowledge), but it would need to be kept current with every RAW format that ever comes out in the future. That's simply not practical.

Originally posted by ButterflySis:
I would ask again that something be added to the TOS/FAQ.


I believe this is already covered here.. I've bolded the relevant items: "6.2 You hereby grant DPChallenge.com a nonexclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicensable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise any rights you have in the Member Information and Media, and otherwise to make use of the Member Information and Media (including publishing, disseminating, broadcasting, manipulating, reproducing, editing, translating, performing, modifying, or displaying any part of the Member Information) and/or Media alone or as part of other work in any form, media, or technology whether now new known or hereafter developed, to enable DPChallenge.com to continue the specific operation or marketing of the site." (emphasis added).

As to the FAQ, I generally don't like the idea of adding questions to a Frequently Asked Questions list, unless they are, in fact, frequently asked.

Originally posted by nards656:
I do think a little paranoia is raining down and some of you are overreacting. There are literally THOUSANDS of images on this site, and the TOS restrict the site owners - regardless of who they are - to only using your images to promote the site. Site council is also bound by those restrictions, as is everyone who signs up as a member. I am not legally allowed to "steal" an image from the site and have it printed.


An excellent point. A good analogy here would be writing a check. Every time you write a check, you give the recipient of the check, and everyone who handles it along the way (whether an employee of your payee or of their bank, or of your bank), all the information they need to print a book of checks on your account and begin using them. You've even given them a signature specimen! What's more, the bank where the check is deposited makes an image of the check, as does any intermediate bank who handles the check on the way to your bank. Depending on each bank's renention policy, those images are kept anywhere from several years to indefinitely. Your primary protection is the law, and the fact that if any handler of these checks were to start reproducing them on any appreciable scale, it would be very easy to narrow down who the offender was.

Likewise, if DPChallenge or any of us were to misuse originals, it would be very easy to narrow down who the owner was. Realistically -- which is more likely -- that I have several originals belonging to a DPC user, that a user has several originals belonging to me? A court would easily see that, and though I am not a lawyer, I suspect that alone would be enough evidence for a plaintiff to win at least a civil case, and probably a criminal one.

Originally posted by Nards656:
The Terms of Service are basically a legal document. Revamping them would require the services of an attorney. Drew and Langdon use an attorney regularly in the course of their business, and the clauses of concern have already been discussed. Changing the terms of service would effectively require that EVERY site member's membership be temporarily revoked until they log in and agree to the NEW TOS. I don't personally believe that enough of us feel that the current TOS are insufficient protection to make this a necessity.


Again, well-observed. It is also worth repeating that Drew and Langdon insisted, against the advice of their attorney, to write these terms in a manner that restricts the rights of DPChallenge. If their lawyer had his way, this clause would give DPChallenge carte blanche to use the images as they see fit. As it is written, DPC's rights are quite restricted.

Originally posted by Britannica:
Specifically, and strictly as a matter of curiousity, does the single right granted (i.e. - to exercise any rights the user has) change if the users rights change after the agreement has been made?

Furthermore, if the right granted does not change -- when is it applied, when the user agreed to the UA for all future submissions or at the time that specific item was submitted?


I am not a lawyer -- this is my personal interpretation only:

Since the license is perpetual and irrevocable, I would expect the rights granted do not change if the photographer's rights change. I also expect that the rights granted are the rights you have at the time of submission.

This also raises an interesting point -- if DPC were to look to use your images for anything other than the normal displaying it on the site, they would have to contact you -- since the don't know what rights you had at the time of submission. As a matter of practice, this is something they do anyway. On DPC1, there were a rotating set of banners (which appeared at the top-left corner of the site where the dpchallenge logo appears now) which used previous ribbon-winning photos in the background. In each case, Drew and Langdon contacted the photographers for permission. Even though they might have technically HAD that permission, they did not want any misunderstanding, or even the appearance of misusing photographer's work.

Here's an example:

Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by Dim7:
I believe it is against the law for anyone even DPC to print or use a full sized original without the photographers consent!


I don't know is it ?


It is. Under the Terms of Use, you grant us permission to use the image for the operation of the site -- which in the context of an original means for entry validation and historical reference purposes. This does not grant us permission to use the image for any purpose other than the normal operation of the site, and to do so would be a violation of copyright.

-Terry

Message edited by author 2005-04-08 17:47:05.
 04/08/2005 05:10:22 PM · #74
Thanks for the clarification Terry!
I don`t think anyone should have a problem with this!!
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/07/2025 12:48:31 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/07/2025 12:48:31 PM EDT.