|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/22/2005 12:35:23 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by colda:
Anyway, I'm far more huggable than BradP.. |
Oh them's fightin' wurdz, but alas probably true, as I'm what you call Fugly.
ROFL
|
|
|
|
03/22/2005 01:25:48 PM · #52 |
Flip. Had to go do some work ... I'm glad to see this thread has disintegrated into the usual DPC humour-fest while I've been away : )
Originally posted by Kavey:
Actually upset doesn't cover it. They were incensed.
And at first I didn't get why. |
Unless they're selling wallpapers to save baby seals I still don't think I do.
Originally posted by Kavey:
And eventually I did. |
Care to share what turned you to the darkside changed your mind?
Originally posted by Kavey:
At that time I didn't have any images I was proud of myself so maybe that's why I didn't get it before. |
I do, and plenty of them are in use on the desktops of complete strangers. Hopefully there are plenty more that I don't know of. I create to share. A beautiful work of art does not shine in a dark room.
Originally posted by coolhar:
Just because you can get away with something undetected, like taking a dpc shot for wallapaer without permission, does not make it ok to do it, or legal for that matter. And even if people are flattered instead of being offended, that still does not make it the right thing to do, or legal. |
But I'm yet to be persuaded that anything illegal is happening.
And wasn't Bill Gates forced to give some of the money paid for Windows back?
|
|
|
|
03/22/2005 01:30:59 PM · #53 |
Well, I'm perfectly happy to follow the consensus here of the hard-liners and not use DPC images as wallpapers. All DPC images have been deleted from my hard drive (except my own, of course).
This is including the ones I have downloaded to "work on" in threads.
There's your next topic of discussion, folks. A LOT of us are in the habit of poaching images off the threads, manipulating them in photoshop, and posting the results out of our own workshops on DPC for others to view in that original thread, by way of illustrating techniques or approaches.
How do we feel about THAT? Seems to me that ought to be an even more touchy area? Have I been pissing people off by doing this? If not, why not? Should I delete these images from my workshop, leaving the links empty?
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-03-22 13:32:15.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2005 03:11:17 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Well, I'm perfectly happy to follow the consensus here of the hard-liners and not use DPC images as wallpapers. All DPC images have been deleted from my hard drive (except my own, of course).
This is including the ones I have downloaded to "work on" in threads.
There's your next topic of discussion, folks. A LOT of us are in the habit of poaching images off the threads, manipulating them in photoshop, and posting the results out of our own workshops on DPC for others to view in that original thread, by way of illustrating techniques or approaches.
How do we feel about THAT? Seems to me that ought to be an even more touchy area? Have I been pissing people off by doing this? If not, why not? Should I delete these images from my workshop, leaving the links empty?
Robt. |
This is an educational site. Downloading an image for educational or personal purposes constitutes "fair use" under US copyright law. You may not, of course, sell, transmit, reproduce, or otherwise impair the commercial value of any images.
While it is good manners to inform a photographer that you are using their picture, downloading it onto your own computer to "work on" it or just to look at it is probably legal. Anything else you do with it afterwards is probably not. |
|
|
|
03/22/2005 03:33:22 PM · #55 |
|
|
|
03/22/2005 03:45:40 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by bear_music:
Well, I'm perfectly happy to follow the consensus here of the hard-liners and not use DPC images as wallpapers. All DPC images have been deleted from my hard drive (except my own, of course).
This is including the ones I have downloaded to "work on" in threads.
There's your next topic of discussion, folks. A LOT of us are in the habit of poaching images off the threads, manipulating them in photoshop, and posting the results out of our own workshops on DPC for others to view in that original thread, by way of illustrating techniques or approaches.
How do we feel about THAT? Seems to me that ought to be an even more touchy area? Have I been pissing people off by doing this? If not, why not? Should I delete these images from my workshop, leaving the links empty?
Robt. |
This is an educational site. Downloading an image for educational or personal purposes constitutes "fair use" under US copyright law. You may not, of course, sell, transmit, reproduce, or otherwise impair the commercial value of any images.
While it is good manners to inform a photographer that you are using their picture, downloading it onto your own computer to "work on" it or just to look at it is probably legal. Anything else you do with it afterwards is probably not. |
Well, not to flog a dead horse or anytyhing, but that's EXACTLY why I make (or made) wallpaper out of images I like to look at. It's just a matter of how they're displayed. I can't imagine a distinction between putting a link to the image on my desktop and clicking it everytime I want to look, and placing it as a background image (wallpaper) that i can look at as well.
In fact, just for the hell of it, bear in mind that I use a wallpaper "switcher" that rotates between selected images on a regular basis. How is this significantly different than clicking a link? I'm not arguing, exactly, I don't really care. It's no loss to me, it really isn't. I got TONS of nice pictures I can (and do) use for the purpose.
It just seems to me this is really splitting hairs...
And you're quite right about the "educational" aspects of the site, I'm 100% in agreement. I just messed with an eagle's eyes on another thread. My point was that it seems to ME, personally, that doing so is MORE of a violation than making wallpaper for my personal use, and that anyone who'd accept the editing ought to be willing to accept the alternative emans of display.
But clearly I'm in a minority here; maybe not a minority, but a significant number of respondents have indicated they don't think wallpapering via DPC is kosher, so as I say I've stopped doing it.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2005 04:29:50 PM · #57 |
| Robt. -- I'm defending your "right" to use it as wallpaper. That's what I meant by "to look at." I agree with Kavey that it's "right" to ask first, but I don't believe it's legally necessary. |
|
|
|
03/23/2005 12:07:08 AM · #58 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
... It just seems to me this is really splitting hairs... |
You are right, we are splitting hairs. But sometimes you have to draw a fine line. The way people act on the internet often makes it necessary to be very specific about what is kosher, and what isn't.
I can see a clear difference between a link on your desktop and a wallpaper. The link takes you to where the photog has posted the image and lets you view it in the manner intended. Copying it to your hard drive (not temp files cache) goes across the fine line, especially if you alter the image to make it larger. I don't believe that is what the photog had in mind when they put the shot in their portfolio, or entered it in a challenge. Sometimes where you draw the line is dictated by what can be most clearly described.
Taking a shot that has been put into a thread asking for criticism and working on it is an entirely different matter. I can consider that a form of criticism, no stretch there. Of course, you should say in the thread what you are doing and show your results so that everyone can benefit.
Originally posted by bod:
And wasn't Bill Gates forced to give some of the money paid for Windows back? |
I don't think any money ever got paid out. At least I never got any, and I've paid for Windows several times. The Justice Dept. sort of went limp on going after Microsoft when the Bush administration came to power.
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 12:18:07 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Robt. -- I'm defending your "right" to use it as wallpaper. That's what I meant by "to look at." I agree with Kavey that it's "right" to ask first, but I don't believe it's legally necessary. |
Yes, I understand that, I was just being very explicit about it. Thanks. But I'm not gonna do it anymore anyway.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 12:33:07 AM · #60 |
Originally posted by tristalisk:
I don't have internet at home and to access DPC I have to use my work pc. I sometimes save an image to my flashdrive so that I may veiw it later. I know that at the moment I have one off BradP's images at home. Its a low res image, I havn't modified it nor due I plan to. I simply hve the image so that I may inspect it closer. I use some of the shots for insparation, some for refrence, and some for learning new techniques. I never print them yet I felt as a sight geared towards learning that there wouldn't be a problem with taking some homework back to the house. |
That should be fine. I'm not a lawyer and not stating official site opinion here, but my belief is this would be an educational purpose and fall under Fair Use.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 12:39:06 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by bod:
Originally posted by Kavey:
Threatening, where? I must have missed that. |
That was Terry. |
Threatening, where? I must have missed that.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 12:48:06 AM · #62 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
There's your next topic of discussion, folks. A LOT of us are in the habit of poaching images off the threads, manipulating them in photoshop, and posting the results out of our own workshops on DPC for others to view in that original thread, by way of illustrating techniques or approaches.
How do we feel about THAT? Seems to me that ought to be an even more touchy area? Have I been pissing people off by doing this? If not, why not? Should I delete these images from my workshop, leaving the links empty?
Robt. |
Speaking personally, I believe this is an "educational purpose" that falls under Fair use and is legally protected. It is an accepted practice/custom at least on this site, to the point where once would expect that anyone posted to the IPD folder that does not want this done would say so in their post. Of course, if such a request were made, it should be respected.
Generally speaking, if I post a photo to IPD I expect that people might download the image for the purposes of suggesting improvements/providing feedback, and I appreciate that effort.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 12:51:30 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
This is an educational site. Downloading an image for educational or personal purposes constitutes "fair use" under US copyright law. You may not, of course, sell, transmit, reproduce, or otherwise impair the commercial value of any images.
While it is good manners to inform a photographer that you are using their picture, downloading it onto your own computer to "work on" it or just to look at it is probably legal. Anything else you do with it afterwards is probably not. |
I disagree that downloading an image for personal purposes constitutes fair use under US Copyright Law (I agree about the educational part). If this were the case, it would be legal to download music, software, movies, etc., for personal use without payment to the creator, and we know that is not the case. It would also be legal to print out the image and display it in one's home -- this would be no different than displaying it in digital form as one's wallpaper.
Is there a different standard that applies to photography, as opposed to other forms of intellectual property?
-Terry
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 01:03:48 AM · #64 |
With music downloads, it is not the downloader who is the infringer, it is the person who provides the "master" from which the copies (downloads) are made. However, there's also a recognized concept called "time-shifting" which allows you to take legally-acquired material (e.g. a TV broadcast) and record it (e.g. to videotape) for later viewing. You can legally take a CD you buy and transfer it to another medium (e.g. cassette, MP3 player) solely for your own personal use and convenience, like if your car has a cassette player but no CD.
Given that the image data is pretty much legally-acquired (it's posted here voluntarily for people to view) it's not too unreasonable for a person to preserve the image data for later viewing. That doesn't give them the right to make any physical copies, nor to re-distribute the image in any form.
However, I hope we can willingly hold ourselves to a higher standard than mere legal requirements. Personally, I try to have my monitor a light, neutral gray at all times, so I can see what the heck is going on ...
Message edited by author 2005-03-23 01:04:29. |
|
|
|
03/23/2005 03:12:29 AM · #65 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Threatening, where? I must have missed that. |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
I would almost certainly require them to cease and desist all use of the image, and destroy any copies they had made. |
Now if "cease and desist" and "destroy all copies" is your way of politely requesting someone to stop then I apologise, but thems "do it or I'll set the lawyers on you" words if you ask me.
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Is there a different standard that applies to photography, as opposed to other forms of intellectual property? |
No, not at all. Could I not consider the file that DPC places on my computer a gift, or a free sample for personal use? I don't know, that's why I asked.
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 06:11:04 AM · #66 |
Originally posted by bod:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Is there a different standard that applies to photography, as opposed to other forms of intellectual property? |
No, not at all. Could I not consider the file that DPC places on my computer a gift, or a free sample for personal use? I don't know, that's why I asked. |
You'd have to ask a lawyer (which I'm not) but I would personally work under the assumption that the obvious "purpose" for an image on a website is to be viewed on that website, in whatever context it is in. Once you take a copy of that image, enlarge it and start using it as your desktop then (unless you have explicit permission from the copyright owner) you've at least 'bent' the law.
Wearing my software developer hat, I find the general attitude that "if you can grab a copy of an image off the internet then it's fair game" disturbing (if not altogether surprising). What you're talking about is the direct equivalent of downloading software without permission; perhaps the closest parallel is that trial copy of 'UberSoftwareV1' you've been using for months since the trial period ran out.
Sure, everyone does it (I'll put my hand up, I've probably got some improperly licensed software on the very PC I'm typing on now) but that doesn't transform it into something "right".
If I create something, be it a photograph, or a bit of software, or anything else, then I expect to retain the right to control what happens to my creation unless and until I give that right away. Putting an image on a web page gives away the right for people to view that image on that website; it doesn't give away any further rights unless I explicitly grant additional rights.
I find myself wondering why the legions who scream at istockphoto users for "giving away" their photographs aren't here arguing this point, too!
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 06:13:15 AM · #67 |
Oh, and for what it's worth I will happily state that I right now give any DPC user the right to take any image I have in my portfolio here for the single purpose of personal use as a desktop wallpaper, although I would insist on a PM so I could spam them offering prints :-)
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 06:34:38 AM · #68 |
Originally posted by ganders:
You'd have to ask a lawyer (which I'm not) but I would personally work under the assumption that the obvious "purpose" for an image on a website is to be viewed on that website, in whatever context it is in. Once you take a copy of that image, enlarge it and start using it as your desktop then (unless you have explicit permission from the copyright owner) you've at least 'bent' the law. |
That depends on your definition of "fair use". You may see it as bending the law, somebody else may not. Again, not everybody can be expected to share the same views.
You don't even need to copy or enlarge the image - Microsoft will do it for you ... Right click -> Set as background. In fact the very presence of that option could easily lead me to believe that wallpaper is an obvious and fair purpose for any image displayed in a browser.
Originally posted by ganders:
What you're talking about is the direct equivalent of downloading software without permission; perhaps the closest parallel is that trial copy of 'UberSoftwareV1' you've been using for months since the trial period ran out. |
But I do have permission to download the photos. As for trial software, you have to agree to a license when you install it. Using an image from DPC requires no such agreement at all.
EDIT: : )
Message edited by author 2005-03-23 06:36:25.
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 07:03:56 AM · #69 |
Originally posted by bod:
You don't even need to copy or enlarge the image - Microsoft will do it for you ... Right click -> Set as background. In fact the very presence of that option could easily lead me to believe that wallpaper is an obvious and fair purpose for any image displayed in a browser. |
Hmm... that's an interesting point. I'm not convinced that just because Internet Explorer allows you to do it that it becomes legal. You can use the same product to download illegal software or pornography - do those become legal too, because a Microsoft tool allows you to do it? :-)
Originally posted by bod:
But I do have permission to download the photos. As for trial software, you have to agree to a license when you install it. Using an image from DPC requires no such agreement at all. |
We're both assuming here; the act of putting an item on the internet implies some rights of others to view them. To my mind, that should mean 'view in context', to your mind it should mean 'download for my personal use'. I honestly don't know which is right, which is why I would err on the side of caution and assume I have less rights, rather than more.
There is no EXPLICIT license but there is an implicit permission - however until it's tried in a court (which it may well have already!) I don't think there's any way of determining just how far that implicit permission goes.
Would you consider it acceptable to take one of those images, Save As (from your browser) and send it to your printer? Purely for your personal use, to stick on the wall next to your monitor because you want to look at it all day but you already have a desktop you like?
If not, then what's the difference? If so, then do you see where it starts costing the photographer potential earnings? It may well be that they wouldn't mind (especially if it's just a portfolio image with nothing on DPCPrints) but wouldn't you at least like to be asked?
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 07:09:47 AM · #70 |
An interesting angle on this is the fact that your browser downloads the images into a cache, therefore without any interaction on your part the images are on your hard drive.
Personally I like the idea of everyone using my images, but I also like to feel good and therefore request that people flatter me with a message. I don't like the idea of people taking my work and using it for profit without my consent. Just to note all development work that I have carried out has been released under the GPL licence.
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 07:21:55 AM · #71 |
Originally posted by ganders:
Hmm... that's an interesting point. I'm not convinced that just because Internet Explorer allows you to do it that it becomes legal. You can use the same product to download illegal software or pornography - do those become legal too, because a Microsoft tool allows you to do it? :-) |
True, though the law will usually go after the people providing the downloads rather than those downloading, and the downloader is expected to know that what they are doing is illegal. Also there is no option which says "Save as porn" or "Save as warez" whereas this option does state it's purpose.
Originally posted by ganders:
We're both assuming here; the act of putting an item on the internet implies some rights of others to view them. To my mind, that should mean 'view in context', to your mind it should mean 'download for my personal use'. I honestly don't know which is right, which is why I would err on the side of caution and assume I have less rights, rather than more.
There is no EXPLICIT license but there is an implicit permission - however until it's tried in a court (which it may well have already!) I don't think there's any way of determining just how far that implicit permission goes. |
Just to clarify, I'm not necessarily arguing my own views, just views that I could see as being seen as valid. Devil's advocate as usual : )
Originally posted by ganders:
Would you consider it acceptable to take one of those images, Save As (from your browser) and send it to your printer? Purely for your personal use, to stick on the wall next to your monitor because you want to look at it all day but you already have a desktop you like?
If not, then what's the difference? If so, then do you see where it starts costing the photographer potential earnings? It may well be that they wouldn't mind (especially if it's just a portfolio image with nothing on DPCPrints) but wouldn't you at least like to be asked? |
I license all my work in such a way that anybody can freely download/print/whatever any of my photos without having to worry so much about what is and isn't right, or getting permission ... as long as they don't start making money off it.
I personally wouldn't do it with any non Creative Commons licensed work, but I'm yet to be convinced that this is such a big deal.
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 08:44:07 AM · #72 |
I should point out though, that even if it is automatically saved to the cache, that doesn't give us rights to use it. If someone drops a bag of cash in my front yard, its not necesarily mine.....
But, i will also point out that it is possible to display dpc images on your computer without saving at all, active desktop allows you to display an html page as your desktop which could quite easily display an image DIRECT from DPC servers, so not only can I view your image, I can view it using DPC's bandwidth!! |
|
|
|
03/23/2005 08:51:50 AM · #73 |
Originally posted by cbonsall:
I should point out though, that even if it is automatically saved to the cache, that doesn't give us rights to use it. If someone drops a bag of cash in my front yard, its not necesarily mine..... |
Bad analogy, I was on the side of fair use, but if someone dropped off a bag of cash in my front yard, then I think that the 'possession is nine tenths of the law' idea will suddenly look very attractive ;)
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 08:20:12 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by bod:
You don't even need to copy or enlarge the image - Microsoft will do it for you ... Right click -> Set as background. In fact the very presence of that option could easily lead me to believe that wallpaper is an obvious and fair purpose for any image displayed in a browser. |
Microsoft will also do a Save As... that doesn't change the fact that it's illegal in some cases.
Originally posted by bod:
But I do have permission to download the photos. As for trial software, you have to agree to a license when you install it. Using an image from DPC requires no such agreement at all. |
How about the DPChallenge Terms of Use? You agree to this by registering for or even simply browsing the site. Some portions from that agreement which, in my personal opinion, are especially relevant:
2.1 You will comply with all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement and all applicable laws, regulations and rules when you use the DPChallenge.com Service, whether you just browse the DPChallenge.com Web Site, use its freely-available services, use the Registered User service, purchase Products, or participate in Subscription Services.
3.6 Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 512 as amended by Title II of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, DPChallenge.com will terminate the membership of any Registered User who uses the Website to unlawfully transmit copyrighted material without a license, valid defense or fair use privilege to do so. After proper notification by the copyright holder or its agent to DPChallenge.com and later confirmation through court order or an admission by the Registered User that he or she has been an instrument of unlawful infringement, DPChallenge.com will terminate the use of the Website by the Registered User.
4.1 Generally, you must use the DPChallenge.com Service in a manner that demonstrates good taste and respect for the rights of DPChallenge.com and third parties.
4.6 Subject to the terms set forth in this Agreement, DPChallenge.com hereby grants you a limited, nontransferable, nonexclusive right to access the Website and the services provided thereby. DPChallenge.com makes no covenant, representation or warranty that the Website will be operational at all times or that it will continue to offer the Website or any or all of the elements of the Website. You may not use the information of DPChallenge.com or any other Registered User in any manner that would enable a third party to obtain the benefits of the Website and the information and services offered thereby without first becoming a Registered User and using the Website to access such information and services. You agree that any information that you obtain through the Website is confidential and proprietary information of DPChallenge.com and its other users. Except as expressly set forth herein, you may not reproduce or distribute any information available from the Website, electronically or otherwise. You shall not store or aggregate such information in any manner. (Emphasis added).
5.2 No Violation of Applicable Law. You agree that you will comply at all times with all applicable Laws. You acknowledge that you are solely responsible for ensuring that the manner in which you transmit and receive information and use the Website complies with all Laws. You may not post on the Website or sell through the Website any Good or Service where such posting or sale violates any applicable Law or could cause DPChallenge.com or any of its Affiliates to violate any applicable Law.
-Terry
Message edited by author 2005-03-23 20:21:32.
|
|
|
|
03/23/2005 08:37:02 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by bod:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Threatening, where? I must have missed that. |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
I would almost certainly require them to cease and desist all use of the image, and destroy any copies they had made. |
Now if "cease and desist" and "destroy all copies" is your way of politely requesting someone to stop then I apologise, but thems "do it or I'll set the lawyers on you" words if you ask me. |
The words "cease and desist" have very specific legal meaning, and require the recipient to take certain types of action and refrain from certain others. Different wordings would have different meaning.
As to "politely requesting," I do not feel a strong obligation to make a polite request to anyone who couldn't be bothered to politely request permission to convert my images for personal use in the first place. "Requesting" implies a right by the recipient of the request to decline, and that right is not present in this case -- thus my use of the word require. The wording would be polite, but it would also be clear that this is not a request.
Originally posted by bod:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Is there a different standard that applies to photography, as opposed to other forms of intellectual property? |
No, not at all. Could I not consider the file that DPC places on my computer a gift, or a free sample for personal use? I don't know, that's why I asked. |
I'm not a lawyer, but most likely not. The placement of files in a temporary cache is an ordinary and necessary function of the browser to operate -- and that cache is in a clearly delineated section of the computerw reserved for the purpose and distinct from permanent files.
-Terry
Message edited by author 2005-03-23 20:50:23.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 01/06/2026 06:56:42 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/06/2026 06:56:42 PM EST.
|
