CXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2730 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2490 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CHAT OPERATOR
Not just production houses, but - judging by the number of Facebook pages with pirated images - the general public. Sure, there's a distinction between theft and copyright infringement, but both are illegal and in my view, equally as despicable.
I don't understand why people think they can benefit from other people's work without paying a fee for the privilege.
ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 779 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2441 times:
Quoting CXB77L (Reply 1): I don't understand why people think they can benefit from other people's work without paying a fee for the privilege.
Because they can get away with it, because they're getting mixed messages, and artists don't take enough responsibility.
The bottom line is that there is lots of free to use material out there on the 'net - in fact that's always been its big selling point - do you really expect real people to seek out the fine print copyright notices etc. (often fairly hidden) on the web site they're using? Concepts like copyright, fair use etc. are pretty subtle - if you're not a creative/publisher/producer why would you know about these things? I certainly wasn't taught this at school, and neither were my kids.
If they see it as a crime, they see it as a victimless crime (tell me - has no one here ripped a CD or DVD and perhaps shared it with friends?). Most "thefts" are not done for profit, so those that do it don't think they are doing anything wrong. Yes there are exceptions, but few and far between.
The publication world has changed - new tech means that often media is being produced on a shoestring out of someone's back bedroom. Not everyone has a budget. Many books, programs etc. are produced 'on spec' - they may never sell, and result in a loss fro the producer. I don't get annoyed with people that ask for freebies - at least then I have the choice. Occasionally I'm happy to be part of the project and will donate my work.
We don't do enough to protect ourselves - we're very keen to take advantage of the exposure the 'net offers us, but unwilling to pay the insurance required to protect our work. How many have subscribed to a micromarking service? How many make their copyright notices obvious on their sites?
Don't get me wrong - I'm not condoning artistic theft, but a) I think there are degrees and b) we're not prepared to take measures to prevent it. And yes, there are examples of blatant profiteering - but in the minority. I'm pretty sure nobody is retiring on proceeds from work by any photographer here.
Frankly I think Whitey is over reacting here - he was asked, and just had to say no. Though I also thought the production company's response was pretty lame!