Archieve Images

[Guest Yachtsman1]

When I saw this thread, I think it was Sunday morning I was gobsmacked. Things have been pretty quiet on here regarding slagging off, for some time. However, when it does happen there always seems to be one individual involved who seems to delight in muck raking. I won't name him, but will just say to him, why not keep to your own forum & let those who are happy on here, stay happy. I don't know what has happened to the strongest protaganist & why he has made the comments he has? but if the thread can be deleted & forgotton about, I would be quite happy.

Trafic Black Spot OOOPs

Yachtsman1.

[denwell]

Can we now move on to a calmer and less vitriolic discussion (if needed) concerning the original post?

How we slipped into this prolonged personal slanging match between long standing forum members gives cause for concern.

I know from personal acquaintance that Peter is a genuine person of great integrity and a clear thinker, whose contribution to this forum is invaluable. To follow a war of words and semantics is not what I come here for - I don't find it in the least amusing or entertaining, as others seem to.

Let's give it rest!

Copyright is a complicated issue and there has been much (calmer) discussion over the years concerning the pitfalls which are waiting out there.

Mark's account of the 'copyright police' is not an isolated incident and we should all be aware of the potential consequences of 'grabbing' images or music from the web - even though our own AV activities may not give rise to needing to quake with fear at every knock on the door.

The principles are simple, even if the detail is complicated, and varies across the globe.

[smithrg]

When I saw this thread, I think it was Sunday morning I was gobsmacked. Things have been pretty quiet on here regarding slagging off, for some time. However, when it does happen there always seems to be one individual involved who seems to delight in muck raking. I won't name him, but will just say to him, why not keep to your own forum & let those who are happy on here, stay happy. I don't know what has happened to the strongest protaganist & why he has made the comments he has? but if the thread can be deleted & forgotton about, I would be quite happy.

Trafic Black Spot OOOPs

Yachtsman1.

You are right Yachtsman, the cyber bullies have struck again.

Best regards, robertg

[Almark]

Back to the original point - sometimes you simply do not know if the image is subject to copyright. Indeed it may be almost impossible to find this out. I suspect the key element here is the use the images are put to. If they are used in a commercial venture, and a breach of copyright is discovered, then you will have the possibility that you may have to pay the consequences. However if it not a commercial venture and a breach of copyright is discovered, then I think an apology might be enough.

Although even this is not clear cut. Say I did an AV using archive material and post it here and on Beechbrook, with links on Flickr (and so on). I am then approached by an image agency legal team to tell me that I have breached their copyright. While I can delete the offending image, I cant delete the image from all the downloads. In Tim's case (mentioned above) there was just one breach - on his web site. But for me, in this hypothetical case, there could be hundreds of breaches.

OR What happens if someone:

1. collects downloaded AV's from here (or Beechbrook, or wherever) and puts together a compilation of AV's, and then puts them on a CDROM and sells it along with a PTE tutorial?

2. collects them and saves them to their laptop, and then does a talk tour to camera clubs - showing the AV's and gets paid as a guest speaker?

Who is liable? Who knows!

[Barry Beckham]

Almark and Others

I am not agreeing or disagreeing because I can't quite make up my mind where I stand, but as a discussion point should we not consider that the Internet has changed the world as we know it. (the law aside just for a minute) All of us who post our images and/or slide shows onto the internet do so knowing just how easy it is for that work to be used by others elsewhere if they have the inclination to do so. If we were that worried about that we would not put up any of our images and slide shows where others can get to them.

In saying that I am not condoning it, but we are all street wise enough to know it could happen. I am certain my tutorial disks have been copied and shared in camera clubs and once some did turn up on E bay. Generally, there is nothing much we can do about that except where the use is obvious and blatant or we could spend the rest of our lives searching the internet to see if someone else has stolen our work. We have to assume that the majority of people still do have a conscious and mostly they do in my view. We can't allow the few to cause us to see threats under each rock.

There is a wider debate regarding copyright that I read in a book recently that dealt with most of the great inventions of the past 4-500 years. Many of those inventions provided drugs that saved millions of lives. Practically all were ideas by one person, picked up by another and modified in the light of new evidence and then by another and so on. This writer was making a point that under the strict copyright laws of the 21^st century, this would not happen now and therefore we deny ourselves a repeat of some of the greatest inventions we have seen in the past.

That is a bit off the track I suppose, but it does make you think a little more deeply about was is right and wrong with using another persons idea.

Personally I am not a fan of using other peoples images in my slide shows, but I can't say I have never used a graphic from the Internet. For work I put on a commercial CD I will use copyright free music or in the past have purchased a piece for use. (As in the Dvorak New World Symphony) I recall it cost $35US. Not a fortune, but probably out of reach of most amateur AV enthusiasts.

I think it is probably quite rare for images and slide shows to be stolen and then someone else makes a fortune from them.

The one thing about forums is that we do often lecture each other and state the obvious at times, but that is the nature of the beast. Ignore that and take away the good bits and before anyone says this. What if I found someone using my pictures on the internet. I did once and just politely pointed out that the images on the CD they came from wasn't copyright free and they were removed.

I will worry about what I will do if I find someone selling my images on line when I discover them . I would probably ask what their secret was because I can't seem to sell any myself. Wish I could

[xahu34]

For those who have some knowledge of the German language:

This video is taken from the series "Plusminus" produced by the German Television (ARD / 1st Program). It describes the practices of the provider of "Marions Kochbuch" (Marion's Cooking Book). At first glance this is a site for reading recipes. It is perfectly linked in order to have high ranks in the Google search for images. The main reason for the existence of this site seems to be the making of money with any kind of users who downloaded the images (tomatoes, carrots, ...). The provider cooperates with a lawyer and applies the particular legal situation in Germany: Download some vegetable images from this site, put them on your private home page and be ready to pay several thousand Euros

Regards,

Xaver

[coopernatural]

Xaver,

No doubt you will be reminded from one of our Oberleutnants that a lot of people

here derive their German language from 'Allo Allo', so some of the finer points may be lost in translation.

I can't fully understand the language myself,but I do get the picture.

"Gott in himmel" (I think) is my response to the several thousand euros fee.

Davy

[snapcam]

Having started this debate it appears to me as it developed that there is a wide range of views on copyright not only with regard to my original query about copied images but also to the use of music.

It is a constant question to me from folk taking up A.V. for the first time. I think that although its up to each individual how they interpret or observe the conventions and rules no, LAWS. The international range of contributors also make it dificult to come to a common view.

However to assist those in the U.K. who wish to remain 'legal' regarding music I have posted a Power Point presentation on mediafire that explains the rules/law and may be of assistance to those who wish to use the information.

http://www.mediafire.com/?f8z4hdntg0xtlhe

Snapcam

[Ken Cox]

Snap

good presentation

thks

ken

[Almark]

Barry I fully agree. On my AV's I use music that is not royalty free, but comes from CD's that I have bought. I know this is not strictly legal, but as far as I am concerned I bought the CD and the AV's are not for any commercial purpose. So, to build on Davy C's earlier posts who give a s**t! No one I suspect.

Snapcam, was this pp presentation done with office 10? I can't open it in open office. It seems to be xml based. May I as you to save it in an earlier version with a ppt extension please?

[Barry Beckham]

Almark

Yes, that just about sums up my view, but Davy had a valid point originally that there is such hipocrasy with these issues and I would love to scan the PC's of those who shout the loudest. Nearly every time I do a PTE demo there will be someone who wants to make a big issue about music copyright and often their thunder is crushed when they learn the music used is royalty free.

Lets be honest this forum and most others are made of a hardcore of regular members and sometimes the stating of the obvious does get a bit tedious.

The vast majority of people do still have a conscience and perhaps we should leave these issues to them.

[Almark]

Barry, well said!

[Ken Cox]

copyright law from another forum

http://lounge.windowssecrets.com/index.php?showtopic=776805

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/09/the-end-of-used-major-ruling-upholds-tough-software-licenses.ars

http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/Home

copyright = a slippery slope

ken

[snapcam]

Barry I fully agree. On my AV's I use music that is not royalty free, but comes from CD's that I have bought. I know this is not strictly legal, but as far as I am concerned I bought the CD and the AV's are not for any commercial purpose. So, to build on Davy C's earlier posts who give a s**t! No one I suspect.

Snapcam, was this pp presentation done with office 10? I can't open it in open office. It seems to be xml based. May I as you to save it in an earlier version with a ppt extension please?

Sorry Mark, try this version,

http://www.mediafire.com/?f8nczao8dmftavn

[snapcam]

Correct me if I'm wrong but are we confusing 'Royalty Free' with 'Copyright Free'.

Surely royalty free music can still be copyrighted but one does not pay fees for its use i.e. ROYALTIES

and that's different from copyright.

Anyway, I'm of for the weekend to The RPS National A.V. Championships at Cirencester,looking forward to hearing Igor on Friday night,

so BEHAVE yourselves and no fighting while I'm away.

I'd hate to miss anything.

Snapcam

[Barry Beckham]

Snapcam

There is a difference and most music is actually royalty free as the copyright always remains with the author or musician playing it. For AV enthisiasts use, the two terms more or less amount to the same thing, but I have never heard any truly copyright free music I would be likely to use. Generally it seems to lack that something that makes music stand out.

Most music we can buy to use in our slide shows has some parameters of use and that is a indicator that your actually buying royalty free.

The Music for Photographers albums we sell are actually Royalty free and the license is for low level use. That means it's OK for anything we are likely to do, but if you wanted to use this music on TV or in a run of 250,000 CD copies the license doesn't cover that and you would need to re-negotiate.

The whole concept of our music is for people like us and wedding photographers would be typical I suppose. I contacted MGMusic some years ago and explained the dilema AV enthusiasts have with music and must have caught them at a good time and Music for Photographers was born.

We now have some 36 albums inclucing a sound effects one