Copyrighted photos.

Something like that happened to me...like you and a lot of f-chatters...i used to visit a lot of forums,websites and blogs...the problem comes when i used to post in the thread of Super Cars in Dubai...i always look a blog with a lot of pictures of nice cars in Dubai and then download it and posted in that thread...but i have no idea that all the pictures were stolen from another forum and then the guy of the blog remove the watermark and post´em...of course i have no idea that they were stolen...then after some PM´s the problem was resolved...

 

Copyrighting something you put online is stupid, you're just asking for it to get stolen somewhere down the line. If the guy really doesn't want anyone to have his pics, he shouldn't post them.

 

Again, I am sorry I accused you directly. I know how the internet goes. You know it too, so don't take it personally. If a person being accused can remember where he found the given pic, he just has to point it out to the photographer. as simple as that.

Congrats, very smart... and that way there would be no internet!

I created my website in 2004 with the only meaning of sharing my pics with fellow car nuts. Since 3 years I paid all the bills and don't plan to ask a single penny to ppl visiting it. In the equation, I calculated the fact the pics will spread over the net, mainly on messageboards, but while 90% of the ppl posting them, just POST them, there always is the **** that has to erase the watermark! That's what I and fellow photographer dislike. Does it sound so weird to you?

 

Every work of photography enjoys copyright from the moment the shutter clicks and the image, as conceived, framed, angled and lit, is "fixed" by the photographer. There is no requirement that a copy of a photo bear a copyright notice or watermark to indicate that it is protected. Nonetheless, in many instances, particularly with amateur photographers, there is rarely a problem if someone sees it, downloads it and reposts it elsewhere-- indeed, there is some suggestion that, making the photo available on the Net is effectively a license for others to download, if not to repost. There is very little law on this, though, and the problem comes when a photo that is not intended for unauthorized redistribution or display is copied, as in your case, the watermark removed, and then redistributed as if it were free public fodder.
There are mechanisms to enable viewing, but inhibit copying on the Net. Obviously, these are not foolproof and only deter the honest, and largely computer incapable.
Welcome to the issue of content protection on the Internet. Wonderful, ain't it?

 

Look,

If you post a picture without any financial gain then you have very little to worry about. Don't pass the picture off as your own work and sleep easy. If the owner requests removal than it's probably a good idea to remove it out of courtesy.

Don't worry about it.

 

I only have a problem if someone resells my pics OR does not give me credit for them, then I will just ask to be credited, and if I am ignored, THEN we have a problem.

 

I know it very well. As you say, there are not many specific laws treating this matter. I have a lawyer in my family and he confirmed there is really not much to do. It's obvious nobody would embark on a long legal procedure just to protect two pictures posted on the internet

But well, even if there is no gain involved, and even if I have no time to invest in suing ppl erasing my watermark (mine or friends' for that matter), I still think, out of respect for the original photographer, people shouldn't even consider doing it.
You know, on the internet there are so many loonies just wanting to attract attention (and I saw really several ppl claiming to have taken my own pics), or just disrespectfull ones, judging the watermark ruins the pic and thinking it would be better to re-distribute them without it. I understand if somebody would do it just for his own desktop wallpaper obviously, but that's it

Comon, live on, it's not the end of the world, is it? I suppose I didn't use a PM in the first place because ppl tend to react in a different way backchannel most of the time

 

True. On my website, I do have the bottom, though, a copyright with my name so that folks should know I am the sole photographer of the photos and that they belong to me, but I never watermark them.

In fact, I think it's kind of cool to see your photos found on other websites. Shows people like your pics.


However, I will always have someone remove the photo from a site where the projected photo is claimed to be taken by them instead of me. Basically, not giving credit, and taking my work for his own. I hate those types of b*stards.

 

There you go. I don't see why people complain unless someone starts claiming it as theirs. People like your pics if its getting around!

 

I am an avid photographer as well. The way I see it, I am flattered if someone else posts my pics on the internet. But I would be upset if they cut out my watermark and claimed it as their own work. I would also be upset if someone use my pics for commercial purposes without my permission.

But just to be posted and looked at? Thats cool. After all, that's the reason I take the pics in the first place... so that other people can look at them.

Here is an example of my watermark. I have been trying to develop a better one that isn't too distracting, but I haven't made one I like yet
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

agreed to 100%

 

Every photo you take has your copyright.

Its NOT stupid to note your copyright on your own photographs, just dont do it all over the place. A nice small tag in the bottom right corner or so.

It IS stupid that you need to do put it on, because some people cant respect the copyright.

I resize my pics to small sizes and save them at 72dpi and not the full quality level.

 

All pictures indeed have copyrights the moment they are created. Copyrighted material can be used for personal purposes. Posting copyrighted material without the owner's permission on a public forum is infringement. See the first section of

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter6/6-b.html#2

Nevertheless, a big part of the internet is about the free exchange of information and ideas. Therefore I also think that anyone who does not want his material reused, except for commercial purposes, should not post the material online. It is crazy to assume otherwise.

 

Agreed. It's like complaining your car was stolen after leaving it unlocked in a high crime area. Don't want your stuff taken? Then don't give them the opportunity!

 

I started to watermark my pics since last year someone took my pic off F chat and put it up on Exoticspotter saying they took it and all.

 

Good point!

To see my pics posted on message boards is indeed flattering! The prob is when ppl start to modify them to erase the part informing ppl from where the pic comes from. Next step is to see them on exoticspotter or other websites like that.

Of course the problem is at the source: the idiot thinking it would be smart to dump the watermark...

 

Than its still stealing...

 

It's a good job many of the big contributors to this site think differently. We have many photographers who post original work rather than just reposting photos that have been flying round the internet since the dawn of time.

I know Jim G is rather careful regarding copyright etc on his P4/5. Luckily he didn't hold your and other peoples views and allowed us here on Fchat all the pictures and updates before any other site. Same with the Michiel Mobiel threads, the Dino and 599 GTO. Check out also the old picture thread in vintage, the old Crystal Cove threads or the Monaco thread in the euro section.

I don't see the problem. If you quote some elses words you would normally attribute them or reference them. Why not with some one elses pictures? Seems like common courtesy to me.