| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/06/2005 06:53:45 AM · #26 |
Oh look, the sky is falling.
Again.
The legaleese is designed to allow the site to render the images provided by users to a global audience. This includes showing a thumbnail of the image in addition to the larger image. There is no way for this site to propigate these images to other users without the legaleese.
This is a royalty free sublicense. That means I can't turn around and tell D&L that I was $700 for them to show one of my images. Because of the nature of database architecture, they can't allow challenge entries to be yanked. Think of the mess that would make!
A photographer has a crying fit one day and asks for all entries to be pulled. This photographer has a blue ribbon in one challenge. Do we have to go back and recalculate a 2 year old challenge? That gets silly and confusing.
If you don't want to participate in challenges, that's fine. But we can all do without reports of the sky falling. :)
Clara
|
|
|
|
04/06/2005 07:43:37 AM · #27 |
Before I reply, I need to reiterate that I am not an employee of Challenging Technologies (DPChallenge) and therefore, am not officially representing them. With that said, I have been on the site for 3 years (2¾ of which I have been on Site Council) so I think my understanding of this issue is pretty solid.
First of all, DPChallenge does not claim ownership rights in any of your photographs. Copyright belongs to the original photographer in all cases.
The terms listed in the Registered Users agreement are needed for several reasons, for example:
1. The production of the site itself is dependent on our perpetual license to redistribute your submissions. Without that license, a photographer could decide to pull all his submissions at any time, forcing us to recalculate dozens or hundreds of challenges. The stability of the site depends on the idea that except for the occasional disqualification, the challenge results are final.
2. For print sellers, fulfilling your customers' print orders relies on DPChallenge's ability to sublicense to EZPrints permission to produce the prints ordered from your digital image. Without these terms, print orders could not be fulfilled, and DPC Prints could not exist.
3. Thumbnails are a derivitave work. Without the ability to create derivative works, DPC could not have thumbnails.
These are just a few examples of why the terms are what they are. I have several more, but I have to leave for work now. I'll be happy to post more examples and field questions this evening. For now, suffice it to say that Drew and Langdon are aware that the value of DPChallenge as a trusted site that respects the photographers' rights in their own work is worth far more than any "quick buck"they could earn selling photographers' images behind their backs.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
04/06/2005 08:51:22 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
I do beg to differ |
You need to keep reading until the end of that sentence...
"You hereby grant DPChallenge.com a nonexclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicensable... to enable DPChallenge.com to continue the specific operation or marketing of the site." Our lawyer drew up these terms and we insisted (despite his advice) that we add that limiter on the clause. We have no intention of screwing anyone whatsoever. We just need to make sure the site isn't open to any legal holes to be dismantled by some disgruntled photographer with a childlike temper. |
|
|
|
04/06/2005 10:30:39 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by drewmedia:
Originally posted by keegbow:
I do beg to differ |
You need to keep reading until the end of that sentence...
"You hereby grant DPChallenge.com a nonexclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicensable... to enable DPChallenge.com to continue the specific operation or marketing of the site." Our lawyer drew up these terms and we insisted (despite his advice) that we add that limiter on the clause. We have no intention of screwing anyone whatsoever. We just need to make sure the site isn't open to any legal holes to be dismantled by some disgruntled photographer with a childlike temper. |
Thanks for the reply Drew and despite the allegations of other members that this is a scare campaign it isn't I simply would like to ask a few questions and feel that the forum is the correct place if it isn't let me know.
I do have faith and trust in the current ownership but their is no gaurrantee that any future owners will do the right thing.
The question I asked earlier seems to be overlooked that is... why does the site need to keep our original full size files sent in for verification.
Another scenario that concerns me is if by the off chance that someone wanted to purchase the rights to an image that is posted in a challenge here would dpchallenge relenquish it "rights" to that image or would they be expected to be reimbursed.
Once again to other members don't get angry with me asking questions I simply want to understand something I'm a bit concerned about. It is a good sign when information can be freely exchanged and if you don't ask you will never know.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2005 11:02:40 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
Another scenario that concerns me is if by the off chance that someone wanted to purchase the rights to an image that is posted in a challenge here would dpchallenge relenquish it "rights" to that image or would they be expected to be reimbursed. |
DPC wouldn't have to do either unless your buyer insisted on the image no longer being displayed here. And in that case DPC could do neither if they so choose. I'm sure that some of the 57,059 challenge entries have been sold or licensed in one manner or another.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2005 11:58:10 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Before I reply, I need to reiterate that I am not an employee of Challenging Technologies (DPChallenge) and therefore, am not officially representing them. With that said, I have been on the site for 3 years (2¾ of which I have been on Site Council) so I think my understanding of this issue is pretty solid.
First of all, DPChallenge does not claim ownership rights in any of your photographs. Copyright belongs to the original photographer in all cases.
That is all fine but why don't we get the straight info from the site owners. Lets have them go on the record.
The terms listed in the Registered Users agreement are needed for several reasons, for example:
1. The production of the site itself is dependent on our perpetual license to redistribute your submissions. Without that license, a photographer could decide to pull all his submissions at any time, forcing us to recalculate dozens or hundreds of challenges. The stability of the site depends on the idea that except for the occasional disqualification, the challenge results are final.
2. For print sellers, fulfilling your customers' print orders relies on DPChallenge's ability to sublicense to EZPrints permission to produce the prints ordered from your digital image. Without these terms, print orders could not be fulfilled, and DPC Prints could not exist.
3. Thumbnails are a derivitave work. Without the ability to create derivative works, DPC could not have thumbnails.
These are just a few examples of why the terms are what they are. I have several more, but I have to leave for work now. I'll be happy to post more examples and field questions this evening. For now, suffice it to say that Drew and Langdon are aware that the value of DPChallenge as a trusted site that respects the photographers' rights in their own work is worth far more than any "quick buck"they could earn selling photographers' images behind their backs.
-Terry |
|
|
|
|
04/06/2005 06:09:38 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
The question I asked earlier seems to be overlooked that is... why does the site need to keep our original full size files sent in for verification. |
This is something I would like to know as well. Nowhere in the TOS or FAQ can I find reference to originals being kept. I see where it says we must retain a copy of the original as verification, but (unless I'm overlooking it) it does not say DPC will keep the originals for a specific length of time, let alone indefinitely. A few months ago when I first asked about this and found out that they keep originals on file, I was suprised and not very happy. I also asked that it be added to the TOS/FAQ so new/old members would know and to my knowledge, nothing has been added. I don't like having to submit originals to begin with, and knowing that they are kept for current and future owners/SC does not make me feel any better about it. Since learning of this, I have not participated in any challenges.
The question of trust was discussed above, and I admit while I believe everything here is on the up and up, I never trust anyone 100%. It's best to look out for yourself. I once worked with a lady who seemed nice...we even exchanged Christmas gifts...then a couple months later she was brought up on embezzlement for tens of thousands of dollars. I guess she wasn't as trusting as everyone thought. All I'm saying is, I want to protect myself and my images. Immediately deleting originals after verification seems like a fair request.
I, also, am just asking for clarification - not to start a war. While I enjoy the challenges, it won't kill me not to enter. I do enjoy the forums.
Jen
|
|
|
|
04/06/2005 07:14:26 PM · #33 |
Basically...as i understand it
dpchallenge gets an non-exclusive right, means they don't own them but can use them freely on the site.
why you can't make visible or not the images, you may own the images but dpchallenge own's the site and can choose what they allow to be displayed or not. |
|
|
|
04/06/2005 08:48:06 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Basically...as i understand it
dpchallenge gets an non-exclusive right, means they don't own them but can use them freely on the site.
why you can't make visible or not the images, you may own the images but dpchallenge own's the site and can choose what they allow to be displayed or not. |
It is not only this site they can be used by dpchallenge on any site or in print form or even given to any third party.
Like I said earlier this is not to alarm people just keeping people informed once they submit an image to a challenge they lose a lot of control of that image.
Also still waiting clarification on why dpchallenge needs to keep our full size originals.... |
|
|
|
04/07/2005 12:03:11 AM · #35 |
| It seems strange that someone in authority has not yet cleared this matter up. Where are they? |
|
|
|
04/07/2005 12:20:32 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by gwphoto:
It seems strange that someone in authority has not yet cleared this matter up. Where are they? |
You may wish to peruse the comments made by Drew Media.... |
|
|
|
04/07/2005 12:30:21 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by gwphoto:
It seems strange that someone in authority has not yet cleared this matter up. Where are they? |
I have posted, and Drewmedia has posted. In fact, you quoted my post.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 12:59:53 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by gwphoto:
It seems strange that someone in authority has not yet cleared this matter up. Where are they? |
I have posted, and Drewmedia has posted. In fact, you quoted my post.
-Terry |
Yes you did post but still the question remains... why do dpchallenge need to keep our full size originals.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 01:13:43 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by ButterflySis:
Originally posted by keegbow:
The question I asked earlier seems to be overlooked that is... why does the site need to keep our original full size files sent in for verification. |
This is something I would like to know as well. Nowhere in the TOS or FAQ can I find reference to originals being kept. I see where it says we must retain a copy of the original as verification, but (unless I'm overlooking it) it does not say DPC will keep the originals for a specific length of time, let alone indefinitely. A few months ago when I first asked about this and found out that they keep originals on file, I was suprised and not very happy. I also asked that it be added to the TOS/FAQ so new/old members would know and to my knowledge, nothing has been added. I don't like having to submit originals to begin with, and knowing that they are kept for current and future owners/SC does not make me feel any better about it. Since learning of this, I have not participated in any challenges.
The question of trust was discussed above, and I admit while I believe everything here is on the up and up, I never trust anyone 100%. It's best to look out for yourself. I once worked with a lady who seemed nice...we even exchanged Christmas gifts...then a couple months later she was brought up on embezzlement for tens of thousands of dollars. I guess she wasn't as trusting as everyone thought. All I'm saying is, I want to protect myself and my images. Immediately deleting originals after verification seems like a fair request.
I, also, am just asking for clarification - not to start a war. While I enjoy the challenges, it won't kill me not to enter. I do enjoy the forums.
Jen |
(Again, I am not an employee of Challenging Technologies. While I believe my replies are accurate, I am not speaking for Drew and Langdon, and they have the right to correct or contradict me)
There are three primary reasons why we keep originals indefinitely.
1. Many originals are vital since the decisions in which they are made may become precedents we have to refer back to at a later time. Last month, for example, an entry from Challenge 17 in May 2002 was the deciding factor in validating a challenge entry. The vote was running slightly in favor of DQ until I pointed out the previous decision to Site Council.
2. Maintaining past originals is vital to quickly bringing new Site Council members up to speed with regard to ruling on DQ's. The ability to point new SC members to a library of past decisions helps avoid shifts in enforcement when members add or leave Site Council.
3. Keeping past originals helps us investigate suspected cases of EXIF-tampering. If we believe we are looking at falsified EXIF data, it often helps us to be able to compare the image to one or more known-good originals.
In any case, your originals are already covered by the above stated terms. As I read it, this means that DPChallenge can use these images solely "to continue the specific operation or marketing of the site."
-Terry
Message edited by author 2005-04-07 01:15:01.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 02:46:37 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by ButterflySis:
Originally posted by keegbow:
The question I asked earlier seems to be overlooked that is... why does the site need to keep our original full size files sent in for verification. |
This is something I would like to know as well. Nowhere in the TOS or FAQ can I find reference to originals being kept. I see where it says we must retain a copy of the original as verification, but (unless I'm overlooking it) it does not say DPC will keep the originals for a specific length of time, let alone indefinitely. A few months ago when I first asked about this and found out that they keep originals on file, I was suprised and not very happy. I also asked that it be added to the TOS/FAQ so new/old members would know and to my knowledge, nothing has been added. I don't like having to submit originals to begin with, and knowing that they are kept for current and future owners/SC does not make me feel any better about it. Since learning of this, I have not participated in any challenges.
The question of trust was discussed above, and I admit while I believe everything here is on the up and up, I never trust anyone 100%. It's best to look out for yourself. I once worked with a lady who seemed nice...we even exchanged Christmas gifts...then a couple months later she was brought up on embezzlement for tens of thousands of dollars. I guess she wasn't as trusting as everyone thought. All I'm saying is, I want to protect myself and my images. Immediately deleting originals after verification seems like a fair request.
I, also, am just asking for clarification - not to start a war. While I enjoy the challenges, it won't kill me not to enter. I do enjoy the forums.
Jen |
(Again, I am not an employee of Challenging Technologies. While I believe my replies are accurate, I am not speaking for Drew and Langdon, and they have the right to correct or contradict me)
There are three primary reasons why we keep originals indefinitely.
1. Many originals are vital since the decisions in which they are made may become precedents we have to refer back to at a later time. Last month, for example, an entry from Challenge 17 in May 2002 was the deciding factor in validating a challenge entry. The vote was running slightly in favor of DQ until I pointed out the previous decision to Site Council.
2. Maintaining past originals is vital to quickly bringing new Site Council members up to speed with regard to ruling on DQ's. The ability to point new SC members to a library of past decisions helps avoid shifts in enforcement when members add or leave Site Council.
3. Keeping past originals helps us investigate suspected cases of EXIF-tampering. If we believe we are looking at falsified EXIF data, it often helps us to be able to compare the image to one or more known-good originals.
In any case, your originals are already covered by the above stated terms. As I read it, this means that DPChallenge can use these images solely "to continue the specific operation or marketing of the site."
-Terry |
Thank you Terry
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.
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.
If this is the case I'm not really that concerned it's really no big deal to me but I feel members need to be informed where their original full size images could end up from here.
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.
This line is good "to continue the specific operation or marketing of the site." is not one of the specific operation of this site to produce and sell prints? And the terms and conditions can be changed at anytime without our notification as agreed to by us.
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.
Regards
Tim
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 03:18:09 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
This line is good "to continue the specific operation or marketing of the site." is not one of the specific operation of this site to produce and sell prints? |
Not quite -- the purpose is to provide a venue for you to sell prints. As mentioned, you have to grant DPC a license in order for the site to function, and for the order-fulfillment process to occur, but the only way DPC would actually be entitled to reproduce an image would be on something promoting the DPC site, not just simply selling your image as a print or on a coffee mug or whatever.
It has been previously noted that the admins asked that additional restrictions on the site's use of images be written into the boilerplate language beyond what is normally allowed, even though their attoney advised against it. I bet every other photo site which accepts contest entries has similar (or less-protective) language in their user agreement.
I think you'll find the admins have always "erred on the side of photographers' rights" when it comes to questions like this. It basically comes down to issues of intent and trust. If you don't trust the people who run this site to respect your copyrights by this point, you shouldn't be submitting at all -- there's no possible assurance you could get which could truly assure that the images are not misused. In fact, by not claiming to have erased the images, the site is essentially providing you insurance against mis-use of the images, since we admit to possessing a copy. Usually, those who try to rip-off others try to conceal their activities/cover their tracks as much as possible.
Since no one has ever put forth anything but a hypothetical example, I'd say that whatever evidence there is regarding the operation of the site would indicate that mis-use of member images by the site has a probability approaching nil.
As good as some of the photographers here may be, there hasn't been one single image posted which would be worth jeopardizing the function/existence of the entire site to illegally exploit. |
|
|
|
04/07/2005 10:53:18 AM · #42 |
After reading this several times. I would like someone to go read shutterstocks agreement. I haven't read it but if you read it, it is probably worse than this. I don't see a problem with them using my images to promote a site that I am a part of. It would be an honor to me. I am proud to be a member of this site with so many nice people. I submit to challenges because I want feedback. If you e-mail someone you don't know for a critique on an image, do you know what they do with it? I don't see a problem and I don't see them using these to make money. I see them giving us a place to share our talents and to get help from other people with the same likes.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 11:45:40 AM · #43 |
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.
|
Just as a note on this part...for the mostpart, we are able to view the full size originals without downloading them to our hard drive. On the occasion that someone submits a raw file, which cannot be viewed through the viewer, one person does download it and opens it with a raw viewer so that the EXIF info may be posted. Although this person is usually not me, I have done it a few times, after which I have deleted the file. I have enough problems fitting my own files into my limited space, let alone collecting the files of others.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 11:54:59 AM · #44 |
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.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 12:00:47 PM · #45 |
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 :-)
Robt.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 12:29:58 PM · #46 |
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 :-)
Robt. |
That's correct. Its not often necessary, but it happens regularly enough. :)
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 06:16:25 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
(Again, I am not an employee of Challenging Technologies. While I believe my replies are accurate, I am not speaking for Drew and Langdon, and they have the right to correct or contradict me)
There are three primary reasons why we keep originals indefinitely.
1. Many originals are vital since the decisions in which they are made may become precedents we have to refer back to at a later time. Last month, for example, an entry from Challenge 17 in May 2002 was the deciding factor in validating a challenge entry. The vote was running slightly in favor of DQ until I pointed out the previous decision to Site Council.
2. Maintaining past originals is vital to quickly bringing new Site Council members up to speed with regard to ruling on DQ's. The ability to point new SC members to a library of past decisions helps avoid shifts in enforcement when members add or leave Site Council.
3. Keeping past originals helps us investigate suspected cases of EXIF-tampering. If we believe we are looking at falsified EXIF data, it often helps us to be able to compare the image to one or more known-good originals.
In any case, your originals are already covered by the above stated terms. As I read it, this means that DPChallenge can use these images solely "to continue the specific operation or marketing of the site."
-Terry |
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. Imo, the owners are the only ones that should have access to our originals. 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.
I would ask again that something be added to the TOS/FAQ.
Thanks again for the reply.
Jen
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 06:18:37 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by mk:
Just as a note on this part...for the mostpart, we are able to view the full size originals without downloading them to our hard drive. |
If you're viewing it, it's being downloaded.
Message edited by author 2005-04-07 18:18:49.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 06:21:34 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
...but if by the odd chance I had a top 5 image I would seriously consider not sending my orignal.
Regards
Tim |
Unfortunately, that would only backfire on you. They would wind up DQ'ing you and eventually you wouldn't be allowed to enter.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 06:22:47 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by ButterflySis:
Originally posted by mk:
Just as a note on this part...for the mostpart, we are able to view the full size originals without downloading them to our hard drive. |
If you're viewing it, it's being downloaded. |
Okay, when I view the photos, a copy is temporarily saved in my temporary files which I never, ever look at and frequently clean out. I do not intentionally save a copy of the file to my hard drive to be saved for eternity, reproduced in any capacity or used in any form. |
|
