Photography copyright query.

[HotRodaSaurus]

I always thought that copyrights existed to the original photographer until death or 100years.

Yet I see some sites use photos and put their own copyright on ithem, though it is obvious it is not their picture they are showing.

I won't go into any particular sites but if I were to photo copy a picture from a page of, let’s say a 1950s copy of Rod & Custom and post it here on this site, would I not be infringing on the photographers copyright unless I acknowledged at least where I had taken the photo from.

Now if I had a collection of pictures from various sources on my site I could not overwrite them with my copyright, could I?

Not picking on anyone here , just curious because I am as guilty of posting pics from mags myself, but I would never build a site and put a copyright on the pictures in it unless they were my own.

Cheers, John

[Robert]

I always thought that copyrights existed to the original photographer until death or 100years.

Yet I see some sites use photos and put their own copyright on ithem, though it is obvious it is not their picture they are showing.

I won't go into any particular sites but if I were to photo copy a picture from a page of, let’s say a 1950s copy of Rod & Custom and post it here on this site, would I not be infringing on the photographers copyright unless I acknowledged at least where I had taken the photo from.

Now if I had a collection of pictures from various sources on my site I could not overwrite them with my copyright, could I?

Not picking on anyone here , just curious because I am as guilty of posting pics from mags myself, but I would never build a site and put a copyright on the pictures in it unless they were my own.

Cheers, John

John,

Copyright laws are confusing. add the internet and they can be really confusing, but here's the short answer. Internet users cannot scan material from periodicals and post them on the Internet. Users cannot transfer graphics or works, without the knowledge of the owner, and post them somewhere else on the Internet . Technically, no one can post electronic-mail, wholly. A user can refer to a statement in an electronic-mail just as in any research paper. These acts can be prosecuted in a civil court, because "copyright law is civil law" . The owner can sue for damages to his or her works, if major enough. These laws can be frightening, but often, nothing can be done about violations, because they happen every day. Copyright law on the Internet is a new region for the court system, though ten copies with a value of $2,500 were made a felony in the United States. To be safe, Internet users should just ask first to insure everyone's safety.

Robert

Source:http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

[Robert]

I always thought that copyrights existed to the original photographer until death or 100years.

Yet I see some sites use photos and put their own copyright on ithem, though it is obvious it is not their picture they are showing.

I won't go into any particular sites but if I were to photo copy a picture from a page of, let’s say a 1950s copy of Rod & Custom and post it here on this site, would I not be infringing on the photographers copyright unless I acknowledged at least where I had taken the photo from.

Now if I had a collection of pictures from various sources on my site I could not overwrite them with my copyright, could I?

Not picking on anyone here , just curious because I am as guilty of posting pics from mags myself, but I would never build a site and put a copyright on the pictures in it unless they were my own.

Cheers, John

Oh, and pertaining to your first question "I always thought that copyrights existed to the original photographer until death or 100years."

Works created on or after Jan 1978 - life of author + 70

Work for hire 95 years

Robert

[Eshaver]

Robert, Thank you for you're words here ! really I have a some what similar situation as I was the photographer for the Book Check the Oil by Scott Anderson. Also Jack Sim the Author for the Book Gasoline Pump Identification guide is suffering from just what you are disusing too. Go over to Shoptalk@oldgas.com and see Jack's numerous contributions to us all. Jack also has a Web page , but I can't remember what it is . Anyway his work was ripped off worse than mine was . Anderson simply published the book Check the oil and didn't include me in the Bibliography as was our original agreement . He just put a blanket note in the back and said he bought everything from Webber's .Well, I knew the owner of Webber's and his wife too. That's O K , I've got more than enough material to do a book on retail gas stations and I sure don't need anyone else s stuff.

Ed Shaver

[sjordan]

Robert, Thank you for you're words here ! really I have a some what similar situation as I was the photographer for the Book Check the Oil by Scott Anderson. Also Jack Sim the Author for the Book Gasoline Pump Identification guide is suffering from just what you are disusing too. Go over to Shoptalk@oldgas.com and see Jack's numerous contributions to us all. Jack also has a Web page , but I can't remember what it is . Anyway his work was ripped off worse than mine was . Anderson simply published the book Check the oil and didn't include me in the Bibliography as was our original agreement . He just put a blanket note in the back and said he bought everything from Webber's .Well, I knew the owner of Webber's and his wife too. That's O K , I've got more than enough material to do a book on retail gas stations and I sure don't need anyone else s stuff.

Ed Shaver

Here's a detailed look at the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which answers most of these questions. Note that you're overstepping your bounds even if you provide a link to a web page that is violating copyright.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Mille...m_Copyright_Act

[Harry P.]

I'm no lawyer, so don't consider this legal advice, but it seems to me that if you take a "copyrighted" photo and post it here, you should be ok. After all, you're not using the photo for financial gain, you're not selling it, etc.

I realize that technically this may be copyright infringement, but nobody's ever going to actually prosecute you for it. There are WAY bigger copyright infringement fish for the lawyers to fry... like "KFC" in Afghanistan. Yep, they use the same logo, the same image of the Colonel... but they claim that KFC stands for "Kabul Fried Chicken"! Really! I saw the story in the paper the other day.

[djway3474]

I used to have a photo studio and I was involved in a case where the person that violated the copyright did have financial gain (a definate requirement) and it still could not be prosecuted.

the financial gain is a Major part of what must happen though.

[Harold]

I'm no lawyer, so don't consider this legal advice, but it seems to me that if you take a "copyrighted" photo and post it here, you should be ok. After all, you're not using the photo for financial gain, you're not selling it, etc.

I realize that technically this may be copyright infringement, but nobody's ever going to actually prosecute you for it. There are WAY bigger copyright infringement fish for the lawyers to fry... like "KFC" in Afghanistan. Yep, they use the same logo, the same image of the Colonel... but they claim that KFC stands for "Kabul Fried Chicken"! Really! I saw the story in the paper the other day.

Kabul Fried Chicken? I never realized Harlen Sanders was an Afghan Colonel. With apologies to Mr. T, "I pity Kabul!"

[Ramcharger]

Generally financial gain is the sticking point. The other is passing off another's work as your own. If you use an image without crediting the original creator you can have problems. Most people will not prosecute or enforce copyright law, it's too expensive. To be polite, always cite the creator to avoid problems down the road. If you are contacted to remove an image by the creator, do it quickly and send an apology and usually this will solve the problem. The best way to avoid problems is to ask permission before using. Generally speaking, follow the golden rule, Do unto others as you would have them do unto you!

[HotRodaSaurus]

I asked this question because I saw on another forum(not models) that someone was posting some old hot rod pictures. They were obviosly taken by a staff photographer for that mag nearly 50 years ago but the site owner had grouped lots of pictures of a particular vehicle and overprinted(watermark?) his copyright onto them.

Surley this is a breach, even if the magazine title no longer exists?

J

[Ramcharger]

I would say yes, no credit was given and the watermark implies the forum owner is claiming credit for the work. Whether or not the creator does anything is another story. But artists are funny about people swiping their stuff.

[RodBurNeR]

I guess it would depend if he is copyrighting the image to protect his "scans" or photos of the originals? Maybe the person is also protecting not only his scans but the interest of the original photog. Hard to say.....but if there is such things going on, would it not be worth pointing us in the direction to see? I would be interested since i am a photog and wonder if anything i took would be there? thanks

[Brendan]

A couple of things come to my mind. If the gentleman bought a copy or print of the picture, he could post those pictures because he paid for them. Another thing is that a lot of pictures fall under public domain where as soon they're put up on a web site or sharing site, anybody can use them. Also if the person does not protect his copyright, it will fall under public domain, e.g. by filing suits he is protecting his copyright. This area is really tricky and the law has not caught up to the times.

This is from what I understand from others who have answered this question on another forum.

When I send pictures to Strata Sports and M&S Hobbies, I always say they may use them however they like to help them sell product. I catch my photos up on other people's sites all the time. I always feel that if it helps them, let them go ahead and use them. I could care less about the credit.

Edited November 14, 2008 by Brendan

[Aaronw]

I'm not a lawyer so I won't comment on the legal issues, except that buying a copy of the photo does not transfer the right to transfer it to another medium and distribute it unless you specifically included that right in the purchase. If you buy a magazine you are not buying the right to scan it and email it to everyone you know, or to post it on a website, photos are no different. Copyrights are very specific too, many of the old TV shows being released on DVD have had to replace the music in the show, because the rights bought only included being broadcast on TV, not DVD. WKRP is one of the recent examples.

I am on some photo hobby sites and common courtesy is to post the original photographer or photographer unknown (if unknown). Placing your own copyright on a photo you did not take or bought the rights to is at the least rude, as it is essentially claiming their work as yours.

The one thing that I think protects many fan sites is the copyright holders like to see the material out there so long as it is not competing against them.

For all it faults SA knows there are sites with their old articles on the web and so far has left them alone. I asked once if there was a chance of a compilation book of past articles and was told by SA staff that it was very unlikely but that an internet search would turn up sites with scans of past articles, so they know about them. I'm pretty sure other magazines have similar attitudes, since it wouldn't be hard for them to find the sites.

Edited November 14, 2008 by Aaronw

[CAL]

A couple of things come to my mind. If the gentleman bought a copy or print of the picture, he could post those pictures because he paid for them. Another thing is that a lot of pictures fall under public domain where as soon they're put up on a web site or sharing site, anybody can use them. Also if the person does not protect his copyright, it will fall under public domain, e.g. by filing suits he is protecting his copyright. This area is really tricky and the law has not caught up to the times.

This is from what I understand from others who have answered this question on another forum.

When I send pictures to Strata Sports and M&S Hobbies, I always say they may use them however they like to help them sell product. I catch my photos up on other people's sites all the time. I always feel that if it helps them, let them go ahead and use them. I could care less about the credit.

A couple of things come to my mind. If the gentleman bought a copy or print of the picture, he could post those pictures because he paid for them.

Not technically true.

Another thing is that a lot of pictures fall under public domain where as soon they're put up on a web site or sharing site, anybody can use them.

How so?

Also if the person does not protect his copyright, it will fall under public domain, e.g. by filing suits he is protecting his copyright.

Also not accurate or true.

Edited November 14, 2008 by CAL