Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even then they could do a screen capture if they really want it
Right click and save image can be blocked. Save as wallpaper I don't think can but the image quality will be degraded and useless for marketing. Serious photographers use digimarc. You can't see it but it can bring in dollars from stolen photos.
... After having my dog's pictures stolen from Flickr (we have since made our stuff private) and sold on auction sites as shirts, mousepads, and everything in between, I have zero tolerance for photo thieves.
I've had my photos stolen by others lots of times and seldom do anything about it, but if I found out they were selling t-shirts and mousepads with them, I'd be talking to an attorney about HOW MUCH I'd profit off those sales!
Quote:
Originally Posted by kodaka
You have no right to take photos of anyone but yourself, without permission of the subject--let alone publish them. You can hardly argue that this woman stole "your" photos, when you stole their image (image as defined by copyright law; everyone owns their own image and it can never be relinquished) in the first place, and then wrongly published it.
As others have already suggested, you're all wet. In some rare cases you have a right to privacy, and if someone is using your image (face) or your minor's image (face) for commercial purposes, you must give permission, but you DO NOT have any claim to the copyright. It's not your picture just because your image is in it. In most cases, the photographer can publish your mug in a newspaper, magazine or on the web if he so desires without your permission. You've got your facts completely screwed around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldawgfan
Not to stir the pot here... but is just any photo a copyrighted item or does one actually have to go through the procedure of copyrighting it? I mean, if you took it then it is yours, but does that automatically make it copyrighted material?
Yes, the instant you snap the shutter and record the image, it's copyrighted, and unless/until you sell or give away your copyright, it's yours and yours alone to use. Unless you actually submit the image to the copyright office, the amount of damages you can collect are limited.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kodaka
The only thing you've demonstrated is that you can do a google search and post a link to the top result. No court in the country would uphold the rights of anyone to take photographs of a minor child without their parents' permission and then of all things upload them on Facebook. Hello. Read the terms of use before you do anything on FB or any other website. There is plenty of case law to support the rights of private individuals to the control and use of their own image.
WRONG AGAIN. The person in the image (or their guardian) can prevent some uses of the image (commercial sales, advertising, etc.) but does not have any right to the photo AT ALL. If I take your picture and sell you a print, you still do not have any rights with that image other than to keep the one print that I sold to you. None. Zero. You couldn't even (legally) scan it and post it to FaceBook without my permission.
But to the OP... This woman (who stole your images and is posting them as her own) ought to be set straight, but if it was me in this case, I'd ignore her. She obviously has problems, but I wouldn't make a stink out of it and embarrass your son. Some people (like kodaka, for example) think photographers, artists, poets, authors, designers, software engineers and others have no rights to their work. In most cases, they're not worth getting upset about. Unless a court orders them to pay you a chunk of change, they'll just argue and insist you're wrong.
My late wife was a gifted poet, and after her death I created a website with some of her poetry as a memorial to her. Not long after that I started seeing her poetry all over the net with other peoples' names on it. Most, after I asked them to remove it from their site or give her credit for it, did so immediately. One guy insisted that he had written one of the poems. Even after I showed him that I held the copyright (it had been published decades earlier), he still insisted that I'd stolen it from him to get the copyright. Some people are just sick, sick, sick. To me, as a writer, photographer and publisher, a plagiarist is worse than pond scum. Still, you've got to pick your fights a little. Your son is involved here, and it's probably not worth upsetting the apple cart. That's just my opinion. If you do proceed, good luck.
when you sell a picture and there is nothing specified as to the use of the picture that person is generally free to use the picture,post the picture or do anything else with it they like .
it all has to be spelled out in contract if its only a one time thing, or your holding the rights to the picture ,or the picture can only be used for special purposes...
it clearly has to be spelled out if your selling the rights to the photo or not.
think about where you sell a photo of someone you took at disneyland.. if anything disney is in the background it could be an issue for the end user..
its soooooooooo complex this media law stuff that the law firm my son works for has an entire dept devoted to nothing but media law and copyright cases.
its not anything any of us can state as a law or a given as its so tangled and entwined.... basically if you dont want the other person doing as they please a contract or agreement is needed.
when i sell file rights of my photos on my website its all specified what they are buying.
Last edited by mathjak107; 05-04-2010 at 02:19 AM..
I don't think wedding photos are filed as copyrighted but just make a copy of a professional wedding photographer's work and and the fines and lawsuit can be quite severe. It's a matter of record. Never post a photo on the internet without your copyright emblem on it even if small if credit matters even if money is not involved. Just a rule of thumb I had drilled into my head during photography classes.
I agree.
And this was my error and not making these visible to said person that took my photos. I only have a few dozen friends I know IRL and family on my Facebook and she's the least one I know in a close friendship sort of way. ALL of my photos are "friends only" and then there are even more filters depending on who, their age, etc.
The last 24 hours I've heard it from my Hubby a lot. I should have put my name on these photos before uploading them. But still. I took 200+ photos and only uploaded 10 - into my photos. She couldn't wait or give me the decency of tagging herself.
She's an old neighbor of ours, our children go to high school with one another, and she did hire me to take photos, in which I told her I would do it for free. I did verbally tell her I would email or give her a disc of photos within 48 hours from Prom night in order to do any editing. I did verbally give her and her daughter a chance to tag themselves - but instead she right click copied the photos and uploaded them to her Facebook photos. You know that little "yes these are MY photos" box you have to click before you upload a photo to your Facebook page? Well, there's the violation right there... aside from the common sense and etiquette issue.
I can't speak for others, but I only upload photos I've taken.
This thread is starting to become insulting to me. I was going to post my opinion, but there is alot of disrespect in some of this, so I will keep my dogs out of this fight. The photography threads have not had this kind of emotion in regard to a topic, I think some of you should agree to disagree. Lets keep things friendly and respectful, after all we all post here because we love taking pictures. It would be a shame to have bad blood over a difference of opinion in here. Just my two cents worth, but I would rather keep the respect level I have for most of you than get wrapped up in the heated debate and end up not posting here anymore. Post your pictures not emotion fueled opinions
You have no right to take photos of anyone but yourself, without permission of the subject--let alone publish them. You can hardly argue that this woman stole "your" photos, when you stole their image (image as defined by copyright law; everyone owns their own image and it can never be relinquished) in the first place, and then wrongly published it.
And as always, photogs should always remember that most of the world doesn't look at a photo and think of it as art. They look of a photo and think about the person or subject in the photo. When someone makes a comment like "What a beautiful photo" they are more likely meaning your children are beautiful and when the response to that is "thank you" they are more likely meaning I'm so proud of my children.
You do not have to ask permission to take someone's photo and you are only restricted in using it in a manner that indicates an endorsement of a product or service (they would need to sign a model release in order to do that) or to sell the image as an endorsed product itself (ie. a celeb photo made into a poster for sale). I take plenty pictures of bands and local well-known street performers and I always obtain a release since misrepresenting them in a way could violate defamation laws. If what you say is true - press photographers and paparazzi would be getting sued right and left. And paparazzi get sued for reasons aside from simply taking a photo at an event. This wasn't an event in which the other parent prohibited me from taking or displaying photographs - if so, I am well aware I would be in violation. But the issue is not the people, it's where I was at and who I was with. I was one of many taking photographs that happened to have verbal agreement with another who chose to steal my photos as if they were her own.
Thankfully I always resize my photos down before uploading them to Facebook. Pretty much makes it impossible to turn around and have, say... 4x6 prints made.
You have no right to take photos of anyone but yourself, without permission of the subject--let alone publish them. You can hardly argue that this woman stole "your" photos, when you stole their image (image as defined by copyright law; everyone owns their own image and it can never be relinquished) in the first place, and then wrongly published it.
OK. lets make it clear that my response is not about the right or wrong of stealing pictures. I am not talking about the wedding situation either. I just want to address the above sentence in bold : what are you rights as a photographer
People can be photographed if they are in public (without their consent) unless they have secluded themselves and can expect a reasonable degree of privacy. Kids swimming in a fountain? Okay. Somebody entering their PIN at the ATM? Not okay.
If you are on private property and are asked not to take pictures, you are obligated to honor that request. This includes posted signs.
If you are challenged, you do not have to explain why you are taking pictures, nor to you have to disclose your identity (except in some cases when questioned by a law enforcement officer.)
And as always, photogs should always remember that most of the world doesn't look at a photo and think of it as art. They look of a photo and think about the person or subject in the photo. When someone makes a comment like "What a beautiful photo" they are more likely meaning your children are beautiful and when the response to that is "thank you" they are more likely meaning I'm so proud of my children.
I share this opinion. Most pictures, especially posted in a social web pages, travel blogs etc. are viewed as a "visual information" not as a piece of art. We say: what a beautiful picture meaning the content of it not the way it was taken.
I almost always grant permission to websites to use our photos free if they are used in the contexed of which we took them.. no advertising or agendas other then what the photos are about......
we have done a few commercial websites too but we usually get a fee,.. did a ski resort so we took a weekend of skiing free,...
we dont do this as a living yet so we are just happy folks like our photos and it gives us a purpose when we go out and shoot...
eventually we will want to get paid for everything but we arent at that point yet.
we do have a website and have sold a bit of stuff.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Some people are just sick, sick, sick. To me, as a writer, photographer and publisher, a plagiarist is worse than pond scum. Still, you've got to pick your fights a little. Your son is involved here, and it's probably not worth upsetting the apple cart. That's just my opinion. If you do proceed, good luck.
