Hawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3241 posts, RR: 6 Posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 8631 times:
I've noticed there are a bunch of photos that appear to have come from Airliners.net on Wikipedia. Most disturbing about this is that the uploader will often claim the image has been released for any use, but knowing the attitudes of many photographers here, I wonder if that is the case. Already I have posted copyright violation notices on a handful of photos that were taken at ABQ. A search for "Airliners.net" among images yields 314 results, which is a bit much for me to go through and contact each photographer.
Interested photographers might want to check here:
EGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 32
Reply 5, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8470 times:
Their names and the website name is still credited though so i'd hardly say it's a violation.
Obviously I think most of us would have issues with someone taking our photos and putting them in the free public domain without having asked permission first but provided permission is asked I don't have a real problem with it.
Hawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3241 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 8293 times:
Quoting EGGD (Reply 5): Their names and the website name is still credited though so i'd hardly say it's a violation.
That's not enough. Wikipedia requires text to be contributed under the GNU Free Documentation License, and images need to be under some sort of open license that allows commercial reuse.
What caught my attention though was that some photos had been posted, claiming the following:
Quote: This image is copyrighted. The copyright holder has irrevocably released all rights to it, allowing it to be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, used, modified, built upon, or otherwise exploited in any way by anyone for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, with or without attribution of the author.
I have no problems with Wikipedia, in fact I've been known to roam around there reading and editing when I get bored. But I thought this was something the photographers out to look at.
AirbusfanYYZ From Canada, joined Oct 2002, 1456 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (10 years 1 month 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 8032 times:
I was searching for something on wikipedia and happened upon my image being used withut my consent. Seems at least that the folks have identified the image as "possible copyright violation" yet the pic is still up.
I have emailed without any answer from the folks at wiki... any suggestions?
You ought to drop by and reinforce that you're the photographer and it was posted without your permission. It probably wouldn't hurt to also mention on the photo's discussion page that the photo was posted without your permission.
Wikipedia has a backlog of copyright violation issues, which can also explain the slow response. I've posted copyright violation notices on the images that got me to start this thread, but there hasn't been any action on those yet, either.
Fly-K From Germany, joined May 2000, 3198 posts, RR: 48
Reply 14, posted (10 years 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 7708 times:
Quoting Hawaiian717 (Reply 8): Wikipedia requires text to be contributed under the GNU Free Documentation License, and images need to be under some sort of open license that allows commercial reuse.
That's something I'm worrying about, as someone requested to use my photos for wikipedia. Wouldn't it open the door for freebies for all? Once more people realize they can get all they need at wikipedia for free, the a.net copyright becomes useless.
Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been...
Q330 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1460 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (10 years 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 7664 times:
Quoting Fly-K (Reply 16): I have given photos for free in single cases where I know where they end up, but in this case, you are inviting everyone to use your photo for free and you won't even know where it ends up!
I see what you mean, and I've also given photos for free when appropriate, but many here still give away photos when they can and should be getting paid. However, I suppose releasing your images into the public domain is taking it a step further still.