Hawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3192 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2646 times:
Quoting DeltaAVL (Reply 3): Actually, I don't think it's a copyright violation to put Airliners.net photos in a YouTube video. It's been discussed before, and if I recall correctly, that was the conclusion we came to.
I wasn't involved with that discussion, but I don't see why it wouldn't be a copyright violation. Not sure how it could be justified under fair use. I imagine that the conclusion was it's not something that's worth going after.
CalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2626 times:
Quoting StealthZ (Reply 5): If the creator of this video had it broadcast on the TV networks you would all be crying foul, why is YouTube different?
I agree with you, it is copyright violation. Regardless, just imagine if one of those photographers recently sold one of those pictures to one of those airlines, then said airline saw the same image being used to bash their HR practices....
ElpinDAB From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 473 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2615 times:
First, let me make it clear that I fully support the rights that we photographers have the photos that we place here for all to see on the internet. Unfortunately, photos are stolen, and people sometimes make money from them that should have gone to the photographer.
But, for this particular case,
Go easy on the guy... he's probably just a regional pilot himself who wants to get paid more than a Whopper Flopper.
Pay and work rules are a very sensitive topic among regional airline pilots. This video was probably created as a parody for the choices of glamorous airline jobs that people expect will lie at their end of the long, expensive road of flight flight training, not as an attack on airline HR practices or the airlines themselves. Besides, I'll bet that alot of people who watch this video are visitors of airliners.net anyways.
Technically, this case might be a copyright violation, but people who post videos on YouTube typically don't make a cent from doing so. YouTube is mostly just a way for people to have fun and express themselves. The videos are such lousy quality anyways that this video will most likely be the end of the line for the circulation these photos. TV = big bucks though, and I could definitely see how stolen photos used on TV or any other profit generating organization would be a major copyright issue worth pursuing.
So, to sum it up...
If one of my photos had been used on this video, I wouldn't mind. If I had made the video just for fun, not made a cent from it, and recieved an email from a copyright vigilante a year later, then I would be frightened and confused. But, I can tell you that if NBC or CBS had stolen one of my photos, then my wallet would grow much thicker.