| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/09/2002 10:03:14 AM · #26 |
Two words for you Drew. "Absolut Dictatorship"
This will help you to sleep much better at night. You & L have worked overtime trying to keep the masses happy. And yet, still you are attacked with empty beer bottles, dead cow parts and other hurled objects (no reference to certain pictures is intended by that remark, of course).
So perhaps it's time for a little old fashioned totalinarianism. Let them eat cake, or rotting beef, or whatever they have readily available, I say. |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 10:04:53 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by langdon:
Originally posted by sandip:
[i]But, when a DQ does happen, and proven unfairly so, shouldn't there be a disclaimer posted? Something to show the photo did follow the rules?
There always is a reason given for disqualification. The user in question ALWAYS is aware of why their photograph was removed. Although sometimes people disagree.
[/i]
Langdon, I'm talking about after the photo is reinstated. Shouldn't it be exonerated of the DQ "charges" after being proven innocent"? Instead of it being gone for hours, then just magically reappear with no explanation? |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 10:05:01 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Also, copyrights are invalid here and any photo may be used in whole or in part in anyone else's photo? Is this correct? Or is it NOW correct because it has been stated in the almighty "FORUMS" ?
by the way, I think the photos I have complained about are EXCELLENT, they just did not follow the rules.
David,
The Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) specifically gives a web host the right to assume that a user who submits material has not violated any copyrights (that is, they are submitting original material or material used iwth permission) until they are informed that there is a copyright violation by the copyright holder. In other words, DPChallenge.com as a host of third-party material is protected from liability for copyright infringements that they were not informed of.
As far as whether there is an actual infringement, I think there is a strong argument to be made that this falls under "fair use" as it applies to academic/educational use of copyrighted material. If the photographers were to use the photographs in another context, I agree that would be a violation, but as it stands now they are being used in a purely educational context, with no money to be made from their use.
-Terry
Not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 10:10:17 AM · #29 |
D & L, I don't envy your position. I think you are doing an incredible job with this website. I am yet to come across another website like it. Just wanted to inject some positive comments into this forum for you guys. You rock!
|
|
|
|
05/09/2002 10:13:42 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by AndyLeeG4:
D & L, I don't envy your position. I think you are doing an incredible job with this website. I am yet to come across another website like it. Just wanted to inject some positive comments into this forum for you guys. You rock!
<= agrees...
These rules are not hard to understand. People are looking for loopholes. Drew and Langdon do a nice job of not flexing.
|
|
|
|
05/09/2002 11:24:02 AM · #31 |
Ditto what they said.
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by AndyLeeG4:
[i]D & L, I don't envy your position. I think you are doing an incredible job with this website. I am yet to come across another website like it. Just wanted to inject some positive comments into this forum for you guys. You rock!
<= agrees...
These rules are not hard to understand. People are looking for loopholes. Drew and Langdon do a nice job of not flexing.
[/i]
|
|
|
|
05/09/2002 12:14:25 PM · #32 |
Irae, why is it a breach of etiquette? The owners of the two photo in question which used other peoples photos were doing nothing more then to flex their creative muscles with entertaining ads. I see absolutly nothing wrong with what they did. The photos are only beeing used among the photographers that created them and I can only see that as positively showcasing them and that in no way does it constitute a breach of etiquette. We are a friendly community here in many ways and it is very obvious to me that the photographers thought it would be alright with everyone to use the pictures in that way. I found them to be very clever and I didn't think twice about them using my photos in that way. I knew why they were doing it and they weren't making money from them. Let's not forget, this site is supposed to be about fun and learning.
And for Drew and Langdon, I'll say it again. You guys have done a great job, stick to your guns. But can we still have that party, I like parties.......
Tim |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 12:28:59 PM · #33 |
If you've read any of my posts you know that etiquette is not near the top of my list of priorities, and personally I don't have a problem with those images. I was, however, brought up to ask before borrowing (with exceptions, of course, for certain situations like siblings, roommates, natural disasters, and other bizarre phenomena). I just wonder if we all know each other well enough here to take that kind of liberties? What seems obvious to you might just feel like a violation to someone else. Maybe I'm just pissed that none of mine made the cut. No biggie. Just having a discussion.
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/9/2002 12:29:20 PM.
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/9/2002 12:30:57 PM. |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 12:46:23 PM · #34 |
Irae, I understand fully what you are saying. And I agree with you. But in this challenge the photos should only go as far as being displayed for the challenge without permission. We are showing everyone our ideas. So what better way to to see what people think then to present the photos in the challenge? That's what this is all about, isn't it. To get feedback on our ideas. On the other hand, if the pictures go outside of this site without permission that is a whole different story and is not alright.
Tim |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 01:46:29 PM · #35 |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 01:59:39 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by irae:
... Maybe I'm just pissed that none of mine made the cut.
I hear ya. The one that used my image, it got a 7 (it could have been more prominently displayed). The one that didn't use it got a 1.
Heh, just kiddin.
Actually, I dont think it's a big deal at all. They obviously aren't intending to profit off our pics. Just being creative, and all. Heck, even langdon did something like that for his entry on the Self Protrait challenge. Technically, Josh Li's image is a pretty noticible component of that shot. Certainly no more so that all of the other little images on those two entried mentioned above.
Seriously, this is so epically not a big deal that I think I am going to make a montage of alll of the previous entries ever submitted on this site, and use them as dots to create a larger image, just for kicks. Maybe I'll even turn the whole damn thing upside down, seein as I still dont got me a good upside pic yet. Anyone know what the heck I am talking about - where a bunch of smaller pics are used to create a larger image? Not sure if that art form has a name, but it's pretty neat.
Anyway, I digress. It's lunch time. Must eat...
|
|
|
|
05/09/2002 02:04:33 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Moondoggie:
Seriously, this is so epically not a big deal that I think I am going to make a montage of alll of the previous entries ever submitted on this site, and use them as dots to create a larger image, just for kicks. Maybe I'll even turn the whole damn thing upside down, seein as I still dont got me a good upside pic yet. Anyone know what the heck I am talking about - where a bunch of smaller pics are used to create a larger image? Not sure if that art form has a name, but it's pretty neat.
They're called Photomosaics, and they rock.
-Terry |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 02:11:51 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by clubjuggle:
They're called Photomosaics, and they rock.
For those who are interrested, Here's a link to a page with links to programs to make them.
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/9/2002 2:13:45 PM. |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 03:27:18 PM · #39 |
I submitted the photo knowing it did not have a chance of scoring well.
I had no interest in doing a credidable Product shot. But,
I thought it might bring a smile to a face or two.
________________________________________________________________________
5/7/2002 (10:56:22 AM) - Don't sell all your photo gear! Quite a unique take on the challenge, not the way I would've interpreted it.
5/7/2002 (3:41:00 AM) - great idea but it doesn't quite work for me
5/7/2002 (1:47:40 AM) - Hehe, I'll buy it!
5/6/2002 (10:49:13 PM) - Unique take on the challenge, but how are you displaying your photography skills?
5/6/2002 (10:48:55 PM) - it's hard to come up with anything constructive to say about this photo.
5/6/2002 (6:04:34 PM) - Deal. I'll take it.
5/6/2002 (1:39:33 PM) - this is pure genius
5/6/2002 (1:29:09 PM) - original, I like it!!
5/6/2002 (12:49:09 PM) - O.K. it advertises, the photo is clear, but Joe what happened to creativity? The actual product(s) might have been more effective. Photo 10 Advert 3 Creativity 3 total 5
5/6/2002 (10:28:15 AM) - Cute idea.
5/6/2002 (8:06:33 AM) - Nice idea, I tried it myself, but I used a mirror to take the shot of the actual camera...There isn't much to go on with this shot, it's a picture of a picture. I've got chips though, I'll take it = )
5/6/2002 (7:14:49 AM) - funny
5/6/2002 (3:51:33 AM) - ...laughing at BR-549... :)
5/6/2002 (2:18:04 AM) - how many bags of chips and do you mind beer stains?
________________________________________________________________________
I think it did.
Thanks for your comments. and for Pete's sake,lighten up a little.
And stop using liberal interpretation of the rules one time and strict interpretation the next.
'It is ok to use another member's photo here but not on another site or another application' 'for educational purposes'
What the heck do you mean by that?
To the one who used my photo, I felt honored. Thanks. I never wanted your entry disqualified. I felt the rules should be applied evenly. If my pitcher should be booted then there were many others which violated one rule or another and they should be gone too.
|
|
|
|
05/09/2002 04:30:54 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Remie:
Originally posted by clubjuggle:
[i]
They're called Photomosaics, and they rock.
For those who are interrested, Here's a link to a page with links to programs to make them[/i]
Wow, excellent. Thanks so much for that link Remie! I will definiely check out some of those apps. Very cool. btw, have you used any of them? Any suggestions? |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 05:20:20 PM · #41 |
Yeah thanks Remie, I will definitely have to check it out when I get some time. Hey, maybe if I spent less time on this site I would have more time for other things ;- )
Tim |
|
|
|
05/09/2002 05:22:05 PM · #42 |
| David I thought your entry sounded like the kind of deal Beavis and Butthead would try to make. It got a laugh out of me but I didn't get a chance to make a comment. |
|
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: 06/26/2025 01:35:51 PM EDT.
