| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/06/2007 12:11:26 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by NickScipio:
I have the "owner contact" requirement for situations like this. I really don't need more trolls and busybodies in my life (do any of us?). So I don't accept third-party take-down requests. It's simply a matter of ownership. |
You're right. It IS a matter of ownership. Which is why you shouldn't be using photos without permission in the first place. They're not yours to take. Your disclaimer is a farce.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:13:44 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by fencekicker:
But the fact that its on a site that child predetators probably frequent is very disturbing, and irresponsible on the part of Nick the site owner. |
What??! Child predators?? You determine this from not actually going to the site? I give up. |
Since my kids were playing in another room, I went to check out the site to get my facts straight and not just go on hearsay. So, as I stated in the post you just quoted, I have seen the site and I stand by what I wrote in that post.
Message edited by author 2007-04-06 12:15:54. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:14:01 PM · #78 |
Nick, the important question is: why do you post pictures that aren't yours in the first place?
Since you're a writer, and you know how important copyright is, how would you feel about someone:
1) posting your material on their Web site without contacting you, mentioning your name, or linking to your original content on your own Web site
2) putting their own copyright notice on the page, and
3) using your disclaimer
It's not even like someone posting an excerpt - you took the entire photo.
Message edited by author 2007-04-06 12:15:49.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:15:49 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
I sent Nick a stern note, but I don't think he has the slightest clue how much trouble he invites with his "opt-out" copyright infringement.
Please keep it civil, folks. There's no reason to take matters into your own hands or suggest other illegal activities in retaliation. |
kudos to you Shannon, glad to see the image was removed, I just hope it didn't hurt your reputation in any way shape or form. It is probably best that Nick didn't link you your profile or include your name, otherwise you may be considered associated with that site or type of imagery.
Message edited by author 2007-04-06 12:16:24. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:18:56 PM · #80 |
[quote]It also doesn't take much effort to ask permission, but I suspect that Nick didn't expect to get it. [/quote]
Who do I ask permission from?
I don't see Shannon's copyright on that pic (since removed). So I can do one of three things:
1) Don't use obviously copyrighted pics
2) Ask permission, or retain the original copyright
3) Have formal affiliate agreements with sites
With Shannon's pic, there wasn't an obvious copyright. So who should I have contacted? I didn't know he existed until this brouhaha. Kinda hard to contact a guy you can't find from a non-existent copyright notice.
[quote]BTW Nick, Do you know for certain how old the girls (or guys) are in the porn photos you've acquired? [/quote]
Absolutely. I have affiliate deals with the nude sites. See my required 2557 disclaimer.
Nick |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:20:58 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by NickScipio:
[quote]It also doesn't take much effort to ask permission, but I suspect that Nick didn't expect to get it. |
Who do I ask permission from?
I don't see Shannon's copyright on that pic (since removed). So I can do one of three things:
1) Don't use obviously copyrighted pics
2) Ask permission, or retain the original copyright
3) Have formal affiliate agreements with sites
With Shannon's pic, there wasn't an obvious copyright. So who should I have contacted?[/quote]
Nick its against the challenge rules for challenge submission to add any text including copyrights.
When you download the image though the file name has a Prefix that says it is copyrighted material.
Message edited by author 2007-04-06 12:24:10. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:22:38 PM · #82 |
Nick, just assume that everything is copyrighted. Why? Because it is.
From the US Copyright Office:
//www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#mywork
When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.
And for anyone who wants to bring up that the Internet is international, I'd bet Nick's server is in the US. But regardless:
Is my copyright good in other countries?
The United States has copyright relations with most countries throughout the world, and as a result of these agreements, we honor each other's citizens' copyrights.
Message edited by author 2007-04-06 12:24:18.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:23:44 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by NickScipio:
Originally posted by L2:
Thanks for posting. I wonder if you would reconsider your requirement to have the owner contact you. It's clear from your post that you know the image is not yours, it's clear from this thread that you either do know (or should know) both who the original owner is and also that the owner wants it removed... can we see some of that "instant action" you were describing as a matter of good faith? |
I have the "owner contact" requirement for situations like this. I really don't need more trolls and busybodies in my life (do any of us?). So I don't accept third-party take-down requests. It's simply a matter of ownership. If the owner of a copyrighted pic wants me to remove it, the picture will be gone within minutes. Otherwise, I'd have every Tom, Dick, and Harriet contacting me any time they simply objected to my caption, didn't like my politics, or... whatever.
I'm not trying to hide behind a third-party statement here. I'm very easy to contact. I don't want to damage anyone's reputation, livelihood, or good karma.
As for a "good faith" removal... sure. Give me a few minutes and then check the pic. (Warning, the replacement pic is definitely NSFW. It's also a subtle dig at all the hoopla... in other words, would you all the trolls please climb out of my ass and relax?)
Nick |
Thank you, Nick.
Now that you've joined our community, perhaps you'll extend the good faith to  Parrothead? Please?
For reference:
Message edited by author 2007-04-06 12:24:10.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:24:08 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:
When you download the image though the file name has a Prefix that says it is copyrighted material. |
That has only recently been added, however EVERYTHING someone makes is automatically copyrighted so the issue is moot
|
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:24:20 PM · #85 |
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:
... When you download the image though the file name has a Prefix that says it is copyrighted material. |
Plus there's this "All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission." at the bottom of every page here at DPChallenge. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:24:52 PM · #86 |
EVERY SINGLE PAGE ON DPC says
"All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission."
On the bottom.
EDIT - oops too slow
Message edited by author 2007-04-06 12:25:11. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:26:37 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by NickScipio:
With Shannon's pic, there wasn't an obvious copyright. So who should I have contacted? I didn't know he existed until this brouhaha. Kinda hard to contact a guy you can't find from a non-existent copyright notice. |
If you can't contact the copyright holder (and ALL images are technically copyrighted), then don't use them. Otherwise, you ARE breaking the law... and adding your own copyright notice only adds to the offense. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:27:33 PM · #88 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
I sent Nick a stern note, but I don't think he has the slightest clue how much trouble he invites with his "opt-out" copyright infringement. |
The DMCA specifically grants safe harbor to ISPs until a "take-down" notice is received, and under the specific definition in the DMCA, Nick qualifies as an ISP since he operates the server containing the content. That means he cannot be sued for any infringement that occurs before the copyright owner (not a random third party) sends him that notice and he has a reasonable opportunity to comply. That's the law, folks, whether you like it or not.
Also, while it would have been nice if Nick had requested permission from the owners of each photo prior to using them, how many of them do you think he can find the owner for? It's not like there's a giant database in the sky that you can send a photo to and get back the owner. If someone just emails you a funny photo, how are you to know who owns it and who you need permission from? There is no copyright notice contained in the photo itself...
Originally posted by sabphoto:
has anyone PM'd scalvert about this? I'm assuming that since the image is still there and he "says" he will remove an image if asked by the owner, that either he is lying or scalvert hasn't contacted them yet. |
scalvert sent the request, and Nick took the picture down within hours, as required by law and promised on his site. Sheesh, people. Being nice and following the law (as opposed to threats of illegally hacking someone's computer or reporting them to the Feds for non-existent kiddie porn) works just fine. Take a hint and next time save the pitchforks until being polite doesn't work. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:29:29 PM · #89 |
Originally posted by NickScipio:
Who do I ask permission from?
I don't see Shannon's copyright on that pic (since removed). |
The copyright statement is at the bottom of every page on this site: "All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission."
All material is always copyrighted by the original artist/author/creator, etc., whether or not a copyright notice is posted.
You can contact the artist through the website on which the material is posted. Especially here, it's extremely easy to do.
Really, most photographers don't go trolling porn sites looking for their photos, so your "disclaimer" is awfully convenient. You clearly don't expect anyone to find out. But they have. You were caught. And now you're defending yourself with weak excuses. You surely know without being told that they don't hold water.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:29:46 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by a_visitor:
scalvert sent the request, and Nick took the picture down within hours, as required by law and promised on his site. Sheesh, people. Being nice and following the law (as opposed to threats of illegally hacking someone's computer or reporting them to the Feds for non-existent kiddie porn) works just fine. Take a hint and next time save the pitchforks until being polite doesn't work. |
Only 1 image was taken down theres another.
But its funny, every month we notice them on this site and that site and another site. After awhile the towns people will pull out their pitchforks and riot.
100's of people create the same kinds of sites and do the same things. Now we all have to worry about our images no matter how bad or good.
Its bullshit we wont stand for it. Just because hes getting flamed doesnt mean we werent once peaceful about it. After awhile it gets old. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:31:19 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by a_visitor:
Also, while it would have been nice if Nick had requested permission from the owners of each photo prior to using them, how many of them do you think he can find the owner for? It's not like there's a giant database in the sky that you can send a photo to and get back the owner. If someone just emails you a funny photo, how are you to know who owns it and who you need permission from? There is no copyright notice contained in the photo itself... |
The image obviously came directly from here ocasionally people rip this communitys images of from pbase because the photographers have an account there also.
Im sure he or a submitter DID nOT just pulled this from a random namless loaction. They pulled it from a page that has the artists name, location, profile, and copyright notice on it.
Message edited by author 2007-04-06 12:32:12. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:32:05 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by a_visitor:
Also, while it would have been nice if Nick had requested permission from the owners of each photo prior to using them, how many of them do you think he can find the owner for? It's not like there's a giant database in the sky that you can send a photo to and get back the owner. If someone just emails you a funny photo, how are you to know who owns it and who you need permission from? There is no copyright notice contained in the photo itself... |
Under photos on this website there is the photographers name.
Click their name and it takes you to their profile, which includes in email address.
Easy.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:32:25 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by a_visitor:
Also, while it would have been nice if Nick had requested permission from the owners of each photo prior to using them, how many of them do you think he can find the owner for? |
If you can't get permission from the copyright holder, then you have no right to the photo. It is not automatically free game - you simply CANNOT use it. There is NO acceptable excuse. Not negotiable, period, the end.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:33:41 PM · #94 |
| To put it in plain language, he's suggesting that you can rip photos off so long as you act when the rightful owner notices and complains. Slimy but true. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:34:32 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:
When you download the image though the file name has a Prefix that says it is copyrighted material. |
The pic was sent to me by some bygone anonymous user on my site. I get hundreds of them a month. I weed out the obvious copyright infringement, stupid pics, grainy crap, and other stuff.
I have thousands of pictures in my POD collection. I do my best not to infringe on anyone's copyright. But if I get a picture without an obvious copyright, I'll use it. It's just that simple.
People, I know you're up in arms about your little tempest in a teapot, but I'm not the bad guy here.
I responded to your concerns (and I'm studiously ignoring the offensive, ignorant posts by some of the idiots on this thread). I removed the picture. And I'm still here talking about it, when all of us have better things to do than bitch and moan about the state of the world.
I'm truly sorry that copyright infringement exists. I do my best to avoid it. I do my double-best to rectify the situation when I do infringe.
But some of you people need to step back and take off your rose-colored glasses. I literally cannot verify every picture I use for my POD. It's not possible. Period. Pie and the sky to think otherwise, no matter what you say.
Now, if you see any other picture on my site from DP Challenge, please send me a kind note (not anonymous... I ignore anonymous trolls). Have the copyright owner contact me. No need to flame me and post all sorts of ignorant threats.
You people are professionals. Act like it! And treat me with the same respect, please.
Nick |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:34:35 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Plus there's this "All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission." at the bottom of every page here at DPChallenge. |
You seem to be assuming he got the photo from DPChallenge itself and that this photo cannot be found anywhere else on the entire Internet. That, my friends, is pure bunk. I personally receive hundreds of emails containing photos every week, all of which are presumably protected under the Berne Convention, and none of which come with any indication of who the copyright owner is. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:35:46 PM · #97 |
| I'm confused. If it's so very hard to *find* the copyright owner before posting an image, how do you know if the person contacting you to take the image down *is* the copyright owner? |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:37:20 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by a_visitor:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Plus there's this "All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission." at the bottom of every page here at DPChallenge. |
You seem to be assuming he got the photo from DPChallenge itself and that this photo cannot be found anywhere else on the entire Internet. That, my friends, is pure bunk. I personally receive hundreds of emails containing photos every week, all of which are presumably protected under the Berne Convention, and none of which come with any indication of who the copyright owner is. |
If he didnt get it from here, Pbase, SmugMug, Flickr... all of which would have the users contact info. Then he ripped it off another site just like his, in which we also ask to take them down.
If they are on a site they are either posted by the photographer or stolen. (Stock images SOLD not included)
Your friend emailing you photo's is illegally reproducing copyrighted material by electronic means. Covered under copyright law.
Message edited by author 2007-04-06 12:38:40. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:37:41 PM · #99 |
Originally posted by NickScipio:
The pic was sent to me by some bygone anonymous user on my site. I get hundreds of them a month. I weed out the obvious copyright infringement, stupid pics, grainy crap, and other stuff.
I have thousands of pictures in my POD collection. I do my best not to infringe on anyone's copyright. But if I get a picture without an obvious copyright, I'll use it. It's just that simple.
|
Perhaps you need a different picture submission system. |
|
|
|
04/06/2007 12:39:03 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by NickScipio:
I have thousands of pictures in my POD collection. I do my best not to infringe on anyone's copyright. But if I get a picture without an obvious copyright, I'll use it. It's just that simple. |
Of course, the honourable thing to do would be to take your own damn pictures for your site. If it ain't yours, it's someone else's. Pretty simple stuff.
Too bad good behaviour, common sense, and courtesy aren't written into the law. |
|
