| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/24/2006 12:47:35 AM · #26 |
I've always wondered what constitutes a publication that gives you editorial rights? Obviously big time newspapers and magazines do, but if someone decides to make their own (for example) NASCAR e-magazine to report on NASCAR events, then do they have editorial rights?
Message edited by author 2006-05-24 00:47:55.
|
|
|
|
05/24/2006 12:50:52 AM · #27 |
| I was going to suggest what madman said. Does that make me mad, too? |
|
|
|
05/24/2006 12:57:03 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
The problem here is that the NASCAR disclaimer may pre-empt the copyright. Since the photos are taken on private property, they may have the right to control your photographic activities. |
I haven't seen the photos but they would have to prove it was shot on their property right? Maybe he has a super super telephoto lens or something? |
|
|
|
05/24/2006 02:52:38 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by jpeters:
I've always wondered what constitutes a publication that gives you editorial rights? Obviously big time newspapers and magazines do, but if someone decides to make their own (for example) NASCAR e-magazine to report on NASCAR events, then do they have editorial rights? |
you would still need to get a press release from them. Go and search for skiprow and read his messages of all the hoops he had to jump thru.
|
|
|
|
05/24/2006 07:33:46 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by L2:
How good are the shots? I mean, are you selling them or something? Are you profiting in any way? Could your use of them be considered editorial? |
I think they are pretty good. I am still learning. I am not selling them at all. I am just doing the website because I wanted to journal the season. |
|
|
|
05/24/2006 07:34:19 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by yanko:
I haven't seen the photos but they would have to prove it was shot on their property right? Maybe he has a super super telephoto lens or something? |
That would be easy to prove. |
|
|
|
05/24/2006 07:35:27 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by kdsprog:
I have a copy of a current ticket in my hands for the June 4th race at Dover. On the back on the ticket it says... "NASCAR owns the rights to all images, sounds and data from this NASCAR event. For more information, contact NASCAR Broadcasting. 2049 Century Park East, Suite 3000, Los Angeles, CA 90067. The bearer of this ticket agrees not to take any action or cause others to take any action, which would infringe upon NASCAR's rights. Use of this ticket constitutes acceptance of these terms". |
Thanks...I could not find my ticket. with this on there I have no rights to the pictures. That su**s! |
|
|
|
05/24/2006 08:38:44 AM · #33 |
This is not strictly a copyright issue. It would be very difficult for Nascar to claim that they had any interest in the copyright to your images.
However, they do have an argument that you agreed not to publish images of the race when you bought the ticket. By publishing your images, you are breaking that agreement.
There are arguments that you could use to defend your position. For example, depending on the ticket design and the way in which you bought the tickets, you may be able to argue that those terms are not properly incorporated into the agreement between you and Nascar. The wording on the ticket is a little woolly: it refers to "rights", and it is not clear (to me without doing any research) what rights Nascar is claiming. That wording may be too vague to be enforceable. Depending on the nature of the rights being reserved, you may be able to argue that editorial use of the imagery does not constitute infringement of the rights.
Practically, you could choose not to comply and wait to see what they do. If you are making no money out of the site and causing Nascar no substantive damage by publishing the images, there should be little incentive for them to pursue you. If they chose to pursue you anyway, they would probably get an injunction against you to make you remove the images but it it seems unlikely that you would be liable for damages (you have caused them no harm and have not made any significant profit). However, you would run the risk of being made liable for their costs.
Overall, it is probably not worth the hassle to you to do anything other than comply with their request.
|
|
|
|
05/24/2006 11:35:59 AM · #34 |
| I stand corrected. If it said that NASCAR owned the shots on the ticket, then that sounds like the 'fine print'. My apologies. |
|
|
|
05/24/2006 11:53:45 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by rscorp:
Switch to Formula 1 |
I'm sure F1 has similar rules. |
Out of the pan into the fire - F1 is worse than most - In fact just using that F1 term is possibly illegal depending where you live or post or how a team of suites define things :-/
If this is just a fan thing and there is no revenue benefit to the OP then it's pretty lame IMO but the way it goes. I don't even bother taking a camera to races now because it's just not worth the hassle with the IQ=shoe-size "security" people. Pretty sad but they don't notice or care that I go less then I would with a camera. |
|
|
|
05/25/2006 09:56:23 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
...
There are arguments that you could use to defend your position. For example, depending on the ticket design and the way in which you bought the tickets, you may be able to argue that those terms are not properly incorporated into the agreement between you and Nascar. The wording on the ticket is a little woolly: it refers to "rights", and it is not clear (to me without doing any research) what rights Nascar is claiming. That wording may be too vague to be enforceable. Depending on the nature of the rights being reserved, you may be able to argue that editorial use of the imagery does not constitute infringement of the rights.
...
Overall, it is probably not worth the hassle to you to do anything other than comply with their request. |
Another precedent is software "shrink wrap" agreements. AFIK, some have found to be unenforceable becasue there is no chance for negotiation, some because the license is not available till you open the package, etc.
However, you need a good lawyer and they are expensive.
You may try google to find if there are any legal precedents for this, and respond via certified mail if you think they're bluffing and want to call thier bluff. |
|
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: 08/03/2025 01:44:22 PM EDT.
