Also have a look at the other sections on the left side:
AVIATION 400
INFLIGHT 1:200
INFLIGHT 1:500
SCHABAK 1:250
Those are definitely airliners.net photos they are using and I fear they use them without permission as some of them still carry the watermark on it (copyrightbar is cut off)
If my suspicion is wrong then I'm terribly sorry for this post.
Boeingfreak From Germany, joined May 2005, 398 posts, RR: 6 Reply 2, posted (5 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2873 times:
Quoting INNflight (Reply 1): WOW, and these are some ugly models
Yes, nothing beats Herpa!
BTW: I already talked to David Roura and Bob Garrard, David's image was used without permission and he already got in touch with them. Bob's image was used with permission, they owe him a couple of samples when the model is finally released.
Eduard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (5 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2796 times:
Ooooh !! They used my Swissair B.747 - 300 taken at BSL and they removed the tower in the background. The use of the photo in this way is unacceptable: no permission, no credit and altered .....
Otherwise Herpa was always correct: asked for permission, gave credit and offered samples.
Ptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3769 posts, RR: 20 Reply 4, posted (5 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2776 times:
Quoting Eduard (Reply 3): Herpa was always correct: asked for permission, gave credit and offered samples.
Herpa have indeed just asked permission to use one of my photos for use on a box, offering two examples of the model.
I want to ask money, though - this is very much a commercial venture, and I'm not much interested in models anyway. Anybody have an idea as to how much I should ask?
Peter
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
Whisperjet From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 552 posts, RR: 9 Reply 5, posted (5 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2765 times:
Hi,
Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 4): Anybody have an idea as to how much I should ask?
There's is no need to ask them. They'll tell you that they are unable to pay for the pictures due to their current economic situation . That's at least what they told me when I asked them for money.
You can either accept the two models or there won't be a deal for you and they'll ask somebody else.
Imo it's not very fair to the photographers as the models don't cost them very much. A nice pictures influences some customers in their decision of buying the model or not...
ZakHH From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (5 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2758 times:
Quoting Whisperjet (Reply 5): Imo it's not very fair to the photographers as the models don't cost them very much.
Well, as long as they ask (and won't use the photo if the photographer rejects their offer), you can hardly call it unfair. Sure, I would also prefer if they paid good money, but if they get enough photos in exchange for model samples - good for them.
What is unfair is the unauthorized use of photo material. To those guys who are concerned here, please keep us posted.
Whisperjet From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 552 posts, RR: 9 Reply 8, posted (5 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2719 times:
Hi,
maybe unfair wasn't the best word here .
But to me it seems as if they don't value the photographer's work.
They want the pictures as cheap as possible and they know that if the 1st person they ask rejects the offer, there are always other photographers who would give away their pictures for 1 model or even nothing than the name printed on the packing.
But it's a genral problem for not so special pictures. The market is just too big and many photographers give their pictures away for everything - or even nothing...
Well, that's economics in a nutshell. Trying to find the best balance between costs and benefits. If you can get the best pictures for $100, and the 2nd best for free, then the 2nd best is probably the best choice for the company.
The problem is not so much that the company does not value the photographer's work. It's more that many photographers will not value their own work, and give it away for free.
Then again, standards are different for hobbyists and (semi-) professionals. While the hobbyist is probably proud enough just to see his work being used on a professional product, this would destroy the market for the pro.
To a certain extent, you have the same in software development. Are you disrespecting the work of professionals when you use free open-source programs instead of proprietary ones? Are the developers of open-source software destroying the professional market?
Hard to judge. So as long as the companies act fair, it is alright with me. I'd say Herpa did, while Schuco didn't.
Ilikeflight From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 366 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (5 years 5 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2613 times:
Quoting ZakHH (Reply 10): That snow looks bloody familiar to me...
ZakHH From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2493 times:
Quoting Eduard (Reply 13): In response to my mail I have got an apology and they removed the picture. For me now OK.
I don't know - I mean, I respect that you accept their apology + removal of the picture.
But as I see from their site, numerous other a.net shots are still there. Unless they really have the authorization from the owners (which I doubt), it seems like they didn't get the big message.
It's a bit like stealing from many, and giving back only to those who complain.
I am no friend of unnecessary confrontation, and I'd always prefer a friendly mutual solution over a lawsuit. But I guess the folks at Schuco will have to learn the lesson somehow.
Here is a list with a.net pictures I found at schuco.de: