| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/15/2008 01:11:07 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by EyeTrap:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
So we expect our copyrights to be obeyed, but screw everyone elses. Got it. |
lets use a different context instead of a car... every calendar that is sold that has a person in it that is not naked would be in violation of copyright. Wow... i'm going to start writing letters to levis to have them pursue this type of infringement :D Nudy calendars for everyone lol A portrait photographer's job just got a lot more interesting :D lol |
If you were selling it as a Levi's calendar with your logo on it they probably could. |
|
|
|
01/15/2008 01:19:28 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
If you were selling it as a Levi's calendar with your logo on it they probably could. |
And if you put THEIR logo on it, they definitely would.
Message edited by author 2008-01-15 01:19:48.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 01:38:33 AM · #28 |
|
|
|
01/15/2008 02:04:40 AM · #29 |
That pretty much says it all. Who's gonna argue with that?
R.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 02:55:20 AM · #30 |
You'd think they'd go after the guys selling this:
 |
|
|
|
01/15/2008 05:02:05 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
You'd think they'd go after the guys selling this:
|
ROFLMAO!!! ;-))) |
|
|
|
01/15/2008 07:24:04 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
So we expect our copyrights to be obeyed, but screw everyone elses. Got it. |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
The issue is not one of copyright but of trademark. No one is stealing an original photo from a Ford ad shoot, they are trying to sell their own photograph of an object for which Ford claims (and has been granted) trademark protection.
I'm pretty sure the way the law works in this area is that you can almost certainly sell your individual fine art photograph picturing your own vehicle, or publish it as part of a news story (editorial use), but you cannot sell mass reproductions, or use it in any form of advertising or license it as a stock image.
The photographer still owns the copyright, even though not free to use it in some ways; Ford can't just use one of these photos in a magazine ad without paying a royalty. |
One thing that is not being mentioned here is that whether Ford likes it or not, they don't own the cars in question any more, there's that whole public domain thing, and this is public relations suicide on top of everything else.
I'm pretty sure I could find an ambitious lawyer who'd take this case for the exposure were I involved simply for the publicity because Ford is guaranteed to lose no matter which way this shakes down. If they win in court, it's the soulless corporate giant slapping down Joe Everyman for being proud of his Ford, a PR nightmare, or they lose and look like the pedantic fools they're making every effort to be.
Way to go, Ford!
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 07:29:55 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
That pretty much says it all. Who's gonna argue with that? |
I think in reality, Ford would have to prove mailce aforethought, and their take on this law doesn't make it so.
I'd risk my day in court had I the time and money........it'd be fun to take on Goliath in such a losing proposition for Ford no matter how the actual case shakes down.
This is why regular people hate giant corporations and lawyers......because they're so arrogant and selfish, they don't think of the consequences of their actions. I'd surely be a lot happier with a car enthusiasts group with their calendar than seeing the slope-browed, Neanderthal, knuckle-dragging, tobacco-chewing, toothless rednecks drunkenly shouting out their praise in a bar on race day.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 07:31:47 AM · #34 |
| And this is why I would NEVER buy a Ford |
|
|
|
01/15/2008 07:43:09 AM · #35 |
Well I just bought a 08 Escape...I love my FORD, I simply won't put its photograph on a calendar and try to make money off of the fact that I took a picture of my FORD....
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 08:01:17 AM · #36 |
|
|
|
01/15/2008 08:23:07 AM · #37 |
First On Race Day, BTW.
GM is just as bad. While I don't have a link to an article about it they too are protective of their designs and the like.
Wouldn't you be?
What bothers me a lot more is when it's done with buildings. If you take photos of the building they come to arrest you. Even if you stand in the middle of the public street, the building people say they own the street too, so get off their private property!
At least no one here has been hassled by the cops for taking pictures of their Taurus!
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 08:25:42 AM · #38 |
anyone into making a ANTI-Ford calender just for fun?,be sure to insert a ripped cd into the cd player too...(a FREE calender BTW)
Message edited by author 2008-01-15 08:27:10.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 08:28:14 AM · #39 |
i think if the calendar was for personal use of the guy who put it together, then Ford would be out of line. But was he not trying to make a profit by selling the calendars.
Last Saturday I went to the local sporting goods store and ordered a 2 hats with DPC embroidered on them and the web site address sewn into the back. That, I hope, isn't crossing any lines, because I'm not making a profit off of a trademark. On the other hand, had i had 100 embroidered and sold them for a profit, I can understand how that would be wrong.
Gee, I hope I didn't just get myself in trouble. |
|
|
|
01/15/2008 08:28:24 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
The photographer still owns the copyright, even though not free to use it in some ways; Ford can't just use one of these photos in a magazine ad without paying a royalty.
One thing that is not being mentioned here is that whether Ford likes it or not, they don't own the cars in question any more, there's that whole public domain thing, and this is public relations suicide on top of everything else.
I'm pretty sure I could find an ambitious lawyer who'd take this case for the exposure were I involved simply for the publicity because Ford is guaranteed to lose no matter which way this shakes down. If they win in court, it's the soulless corporate giant slapping down Joe Everyman for being proud of his Ford, a PR nightmare, or they lose and look like the pedantic fools they're making every effort to be.
Way to go, Ford! |
Sell calendars with pictures of Miller Lite, Coke, the Patriots and perhaps Kawasaki photos inside and see how long till they come and hassle you. "But it's free advertising!" won't work with them either. "But I bought the beer, I paid for the ticket to the game..." isn't going to work either.
AlanFreed used to pose pics of steeler games here as he has a press pass. the NFL caught wind of it and told him in no uncertain terms to stop, and take down all images he has of NFL stuff. And he wasn't even trying to sell them!
So I guess you all better not watch any more NFL games either then!
Message edited by author 2008-01-16 07:19:46.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 08:30:39 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
You'd think they'd go after the guys selling this:
|
DPC should have one... maybe with the fotofight or eyefetch logos :-D
Message edited by author 2008-01-15 08:34:06.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 09:21:30 AM · #42 |
I was once stopped by a manager for taking a photo of a friend while having lunch in Panera Bread and he explained to me that the interior design was trademarked and I couldn't photograph it. I haven't been back to any location since.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 09:25:08 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by cynthiann:
... Last Saturday I went to the local sporting goods store and ordered a 2 hats with DPC embroidered on them and the web site address sewn into the back. That, I hope, isn't crossing any lines, because I'm not making a profit off of a trademark. ... |
I hope they turn out good. Be sure to post a pic of the finished product -- maybe in the "identifying other DPCers" thread.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 09:25:47 AM · #44 |
How many "someone stole my photo and put it on flickr, we should burn their village" threads are there on DPC?
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 09:27:38 AM · #45 |
I always get a chuckle out of situations like this. People puff their chest's out and talk about how they can't do that or just let them try, etc. But in reality, probably just about every business out there has some kind of wording about their products, trademarks, logs, name, etc. And lets face it, 99.9999% of the public could care less (if they even give it a thought) about it. I don't even care about it and I'm a photographer. But then, I've spent time learning about copyright and what it means. I'm not worried one bit if I take a picture and it has any Ford or other brand of auto in it. There are no brand cops out there looking at every picture trying to spot the Ford emblem in the image so they can send their lawyers after them. If Ford sends you a letter to stop, you can bet it's for a very good reason. And for all of the puffed up chest's and "Just let them try" comments... there are very few people here on DPC that would spend the money to go the first round with Ford's lawyers in court. Even if Ford didn't win, just the cost of defending yourself could take more than most of us make in a year or even a few years. You might not like it, but if it was a choice of not using an image that wasn't making you any money or not that much money or paying 10's of thousands to a lawyer over it... well, I'm pretty sure what most people would do.
And if it wasn't for people that liked to rip off and make money on other's brand name, the businesess wouldn't have to do things like this and their wouldn't be laws to protect them.
Mike |
|
|
|
01/15/2008 09:28:12 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by dsray:
I was once stopped by a manager for taking a photo of a friend while having lunch in Panera Bread and he explained to me that the interior design was trademarked and I couldn't photograph it. I haven't been back to any location since. |
mmmmm... I love that place... good stuff... might have to go get some today. *drools*
Sorry, but my appetite for good eats overrides my desire to be spiteful of trademark protection.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 09:45:56 AM · #47 |
Found On Road Dead
But if any off you play any racing games on XBOX 360 or PS3 lets take Grand Theft Auto for an example they have all types of cars in their since they did not get the rights they dont call them ford mustangs etc. also you can tell whats a ford, pontiac or whatever in the game.
So my point or question is if they would have not used the name Ford or mustang or their logos anywhere in the calendar and lets say they photoshoped it off the car
Would ford bother them then? or What if they customized the car alot?
Message edited by author 2008-01-15 09:50:49.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 09:47:22 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
So we expect our copyrights to be obeyed, but screw everyone elses. Got it. |
The issue is not one of copyright but of trademark. No one is stealing an original photo from a Ford ad shoot, they are trying to sell their own photograph of an object for which Ford claims (and has been granted) trademark protection.
I'm pretty sure the way the law works in this area is that you can almost certainly sell your individual fine art photograph picturing your own vehicle, or publish it as part of a news story (editorial use), but you cannot sell mass reproductions, or use it in any form of advertising or license it as a stock image.
The photographer still owns the copyright, even though not free to use it in some ways; Ford can't just use one of these photos in a magazine ad without paying a royalty. |
Correct. However, beyond the trademarked logo I believe that the design is automatically copyrighted and thus protected from reproduction.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 09:49:36 AM · #49 |
OK...so I read the letter. From what I understand is that they don't want people associating themselves with the Ford name. So therefore, if I were a professional photographer, I drove out to location in my Ford truck, or daresay, my Mustang, and pulled my equipment out of it (in a location where people could see me), then the perception could be that I'm using the status of my vehicle (which I have the title for) to further my business. And then they would be entitled to ask for part of my profits or give me a cease and desist for driving my vehicle for the purpose of business.
Yes, that may be taking it to an extreme, but it follows the intent of their letter.
|
|
|
|
01/15/2008 09:51:05 AM · #50 |
adding to my post above...
I read alot of magazines or watch alot of television shows and I see people customized mustangs or toyotas all over magazines/calendars or the shows I watch.
Do they have to get permission from ford to sell them or show them?
Message edited by author 2008-01-15 09:51:34.
|
|
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: 08/13/2025 09:49:28 AM EDT.
