a wee moan
- Thread starter Dreadhead
- Start date
N
Nomad
Guest
widu13
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
It is accepted that images are marked as copyright/marked and that evidence of ORIGINAL ownership can be evidenced, i.e. the raw image.
So are you saying if I take a picture of the countryside and post it on my website I don't have copyright to the picture and you're free to hack from me and use it on yours?
The copyright of an image vests automatically with the original creator, if it is not you then you require permission to use it, if you do not have that permission then you are liable for damages if you use that image for commercial gain.
widu13
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
This thread has gone a little off track, but i am fascinated, would somebody mind answering me a question please?
Highly unlikely i know, but, if for instance i posted a photo on here(as i have loads) and someone decided it was brilliant! And took it to front a massive new advertising campaign, for a huge company, and it became globally recognised, how do i stand?
Bearing in mind, i don't have two pennies to scratch my bum with (re legal action)
Thanks
Not so bright .
Ivan...
Highly unlikely i know, but, if for instance i posted a photo on here(as i have loads) and someone decided it was brilliant! And took it to front a massive new advertising campaign, for a huge company, and it became globally recognised, how do i stand?
Bearing in mind, i don't have two pennies to scratch my bum with (re legal action)
Thanks
Not so bright .
Ivan...
No, you are automatically liable if you are commercially using an image without clearing rights first, and that liability does not just go away because you stop using the image if someone challenges you. The fact that you do not know who you owe the money to or how much should be of massive concern to your boss.
"If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants." Isaac Newton
Or in other words, pretty much anyone's ideas and designs have been to some extent influenced by those of someone else before them. There's very little that's totally new.
Or in other words, pretty much anyone's ideas and designs have been to some extent influenced by those of someone else before them. There's very little that's totally new.
Any legal eagles in here, i know its off track, but providing it doesnt get nasty, im finding it quite interesting,
and in the eyes of the law would love to see whos right, keep it clean guys
and in the eyes of the law would love to see whos right, keep it clean guys
In that situation, provided you could prove ownership (not sure how you would do that) someone would owe you a great deal of money.
The US Postal service just lost an appeal and now owe a sculptor just under a million dollars because they used a photograph taken by someone else of the sculptors work on a stamp without his permission , they paid the photographer for the image but not the sculptor for the design in the image.
Ok what about all the photos used of say the angel of the north, on calenders or post cards do theey ha ve to get permission to use them???
My last post was more for dramatic effect , to show the possibilities of ignoring the rules on these things! It's different in the US, IIRC in the UK ( as I'm a criminal specialist and not a civil lawyer ) you can use images of architecture and sculpture without the architect/artist's permission - as long as you have the right to use the image in the first place, but you can't adversely alter the appearance of the item in the picture without their permission, like tearing off the Angel Of The North's wings. Copyright is not like trademark, you don't have to apply for it, but anyone photographing a trademarked image, especially one from a heavily litigious company like Disney for example, would soon find out what the consequences may be if they tried to sell the image or use it commercially. Patent is an entirely different matter again.
If they're used commercially then yes.
The problem is trying to enforce it as the attitude nowadays seems to be if you publish it on the net you've given me the right to hack it for my website.
I do have to agree with those that say the designs are used and reused over and over, think of the Woodlore Knife shape (synonymous to bushcraft i would argue) people have blatantly copied the design because it works and looks good, they have put their own twists on it too with a tweak her and there (i do it all the time) BUT and it is a big one, not one of these clones is a Woodlore. You will never stop people seeing an idea and thinking "I could do that too" what you can say is that what they produce will only ever be a "Clone" of what you pioneered!
I honestly think that your work speaks for itself mate not just the design but the quality and attention to detail, I for one would want the peace of mind I would gain in knowing that what I owned was "Genuine" and not a "copy or clone".
Just my thoughts
Dave
I honestly think that your work speaks for itself mate not just the design but the quality and attention to detail, I for one would want the peace of mind I would gain in knowing that what I owned was "Genuine" and not a "copy or clone".
Just my thoughts
Dave
Having been away from this great forum for more than a few years and having only recently returned I am not familiar with your work ( just looked at your website, very impressive I must say) I can understand your concerns for sure! I reckon Dave Bromley pretty much covers it though!
That at aside Iam over in Norway right now as it happens and staying with friends in Mysen, I love the place. Must be my 10th spell over here now! Home to night though sadly!
That's a good point; brand loyalty effectively.
Incidentally, on one of the Woodlore courses I was photgraphed by Ray, and that image is on his website.
I have a little venture on a not-for-profit basis which fits superbly with using that image, so I contacted Woodlore and asked for permission to use it. Their reply was that the image didn't belong to them but to Ray as the photographer, and as such final permission could only be granted by him. The final position is that I have permission to use it on a limited basis, but I was asked to insert a "Copyright Woodlore Limited" mark on it which is what I have done.
This kind of thing is rife in academic circles too; illustrators are constantly moaning about lecturers etc just copying/scanning their work into presentations without so much as a credit.
doesn't mean it hasn't been though
pretty sure I saw very similar pouches on skyravenwolf in the past.
must be 5 years ago or more so the exact design they used is a little foggy
I think unless somone is passing off their work as yours I'd let it go
Similar threads
