Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Illegal W/out The Permission Of Airlines?  
User currently offlineAdamWright From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3563 times:

I've had many people come up to me and tell me that publicly showing my pictures of aircraft with trademarked airline logos with commercial intent is illegal since it is done without the written permission of the airlines.

Whats the real deal behind all this.. are we all a bunch of illegal photographers making and selling photos without the permission of airlines?

-Adam

12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAndrewUber From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2528 posts, RR: 40
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3548 times:

If you shoot a photo from public property, it doesn't matter WHAT the subject is - YOU own the photo, and you are allowed to do whatever you want with it.

If you take a photo from THEIR property (the airline) and they object, then you have a problem.

One such example: I shot photos of the first aircraft in a certain livery, uploaded them, had them accepted (made the top of 24 hours too, dammit!!) - the airline saw the photo and since it hadn't been publicly released yet - they asked me to remove the image. I quickly e-mailed the admin folks here at a.net, and within an hour my 15,000 hit photo was removed.

Such is life.

Anyway - as long as you're not trespassing, your images are YOUR images!

Drew



I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
User currently offlineCadet57 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 9085 posts, RR: 30
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3530 times:

Quoting AndrewUber (Reply 1):
Anyway - as long as you're not trespassing, your images are YOUR images!

So on the non-airport side of the fence?



Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 29
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3524 times:

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 2):

So on the non-airport side of the fence?

Last time I checked, airport properties are not owned by the airlines.  Wink

Harry



Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3492 times:

Quoting AndrewUber (Reply 1):
If you shoot a photo from public property, it doesn't matter WHAT the subject is - YOU own the photo, and you are allowed to do whatever you want with it.

That is not even close to being true. You are allowed journalistic use without permission, but taking someone's picture and selling it commercially without their permission will get your tit in a wringer very fast.

Look up model release.


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3463 times:

And even journalistic or hobby use can have restrictions, most companies just choose not to enforce those restrictions.

There was a massive row last year (or a bit earlier) when the owners of one of New York's most prominent landmarks wanted to collect license fees for every picture with their building on it, and demanded the city enforce their rights to not have their building photographed without their permission.

In another case a company that owns a tree somewhere in the US (which is their trademark) have successfully sued people for putting pictures that show that tree (taken from land not belonging to that company) for trademark infringement.

But most companies just figure that the free publicity is well worth it and will only take action if their trademarks are used in defamatory ways or ways that would otherwise harm them.
For example doctored pictures designed to make an airline look bad would fall under that.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineCadet57 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 9085 posts, RR: 30
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3371 times:

So basically when i bought a pic by Mark G of a Cape Air cessna and a US 732, he and i were breaking the law?


Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3355 times:

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 6):
he and i were breaking the law?

You are over simplifying.....

Re-read the above posts.  Wink


User currently offlineB777-700 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3311 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 4):
Look up model release.

You don't need a model release for aircraft.


User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3766 posts, RR: 60
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3304 times:

Quoting B777-700 (Reply 8):
Quoting JeffM (Reply 4):
Look up model release.

You don't need a model release for aircraft

Quoting JeffM (Reply 4):
Quoting AndrewUber (Reply 1):
If you shoot a photo from public property, it doesn't matter WHAT the subject is - YOU own the photo, and you are allowed to do whatever you want with it.

That is not even close to being true. You are allowed journalistic use without permission, but taking someone's picture and selling it commercially without their permission will get your tit in a wringer very fast.

Re-read the bold parts please...

[Edited 2005-11-13 20:49:37]


Jet Visuals
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3276 times:

Quoting B777-700 (Reply 8):
You don't need a model release for aircraft.

Don't be stupid, I was not refering to an aircraft.

Quoting AndrewUber (Reply 1):
it doesn't matter WHAT the subject is

That is what I was referring to...


User currently offlineB777-700 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3249 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 10):
Don't be stupid, I was not refering to an aircraft.

He wasn't refering to people.


User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 31
Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3175 times:

So, what now? We don't need a model release contract for photographing aircraft but can't publish the pics?

Gerardo
A tad confused ....



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
The Process Of Screening Debate posted Thu Sep 14 2006 14:10:59 by Psych
Is Confidence Getting The Best Of Me? posted Mon Sep 11 2006 00:32:38 by San747
Show Me The Advantage Of PhotoShop On This One! posted Tue Aug 22 2006 21:10:40 by Lufthansi
The Importance Of PC Screen Quality When Editing. posted Thu May 18 2006 20:57:57 by Thom@s
Gripen Fly-by At His Majesty The King Of Sweden's posted Sun Apr 30 2006 13:25:28 by 7E7Fan
The Importance Of Photography posted Mon Apr 24 2006 15:05:14 by 53Sqdn
The Question Of All Time: Best Camera? posted Wed Apr 19 2006 21:54:50 by Schreiner
Help This F/O Pick Out The Right Cam Please! posted Wed Apr 12 2006 18:48:28 by Pilotaydin
What Is The Meaning Of "motive" Rejection? posted Wed Apr 5 2006 09:35:44 by Walter2222
The Gift Of The Database - The Career Of A Jet posted Thu Mar 23 2006 09:56:21 by Sulman