PUnmuth@VIE
Topic Author
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

Copyright Issue Again?

Mon May 13, 2002 7:14 pm

Hi guys.
Check this site out http://www.beap.be/. Did you guys give permission. I know at least two shots from here. Andrew Hunt and Chris Sheldon arent the ones on the right hand side yours?
Peter
-
 
ebos
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2001 7:48 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Mon May 13, 2002 7:20 pm

They have at least my permission for usage of the left photo.

Sven
An-225 stalker: 1 x LUX, 1 x EIN, 1 x DXB, 2 x SHJ, 3 x CGN
 
da Fwog
Posts: 845
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 1999 5:25 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Mon May 13, 2002 8:01 pm

well spotted!

I have NO IDEA if they ever asked for permission. I can't find a request amongst my emails, but bearing in mind that every time I'm away overnight I come back to find 40-odd new emails in my inbox, it's starting to get difficult to keep track. Maybe I need a secretary?
 
andyhunt
Crew
Posts: 1226
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2001 10:50 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Mon May 13, 2002 10:02 pm

Same here, note sure whether or not I gave permission. Oops.

Andrew
Full frame always beats post processing
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Mon May 13, 2002 10:19 pm

Well I have not had any request from them, and they molested my shot... a big fat BEAP over it.  Angry
/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
ebos
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2001 7:48 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Mon May 13, 2002 10:40 pm

I have not saved the particular email, but i remember the request came from publisite that designed the website.

Sven
An-225 stalker: 1 x LUX, 1 x EIN, 1 x DXB, 2 x SHJ, 3 x CGN
 
luchtzak
Posts: 457
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2001 1:03 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Mon May 13, 2002 11:57 pm

Hi everybody! Please e-mail to paul.vandenhende@skynet.be ,he's responsible for the site administration, he sent me an e-mail saying it wasn't intentional to use the pictures, so e-mail him, and he will apologize and ask permission for the pictures, or update his site!

Glad to help!

Kind regards
luchtzak
 
LX-Maria
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 6:44 pm

Copyright Not Valid!

Tue May 14, 2002 1:49 am

Hello,
Here we go again.

Is it allowed to take photos of a registered trademark like company names and publish them on the net ?

By making the photo and publishing it; we violate ourselves the copyright of that company.

Of course; as these photos are good publicity; no company ever complained.

Honestly; do you think that Singapore Airlines should pay you; when they want to use your Singap-747 ?

Let's be honest; you can't have the copyright of something you don't own yourself.

Take a photo of just the logo of McDonalds and each time you see one on the site or a newspaper, they will pay you.

Come on guys; it's a hobby; spotting has nothing to do with copyrights or business.
I you don't want everybody to see your photo; put them in a closed-safety-deposit-box.

 
PUnmuth@VIE
Topic Author
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 2:01 am

With all the respect you are messing up two things:
1.) The logo owners copyright. Yes it is his own. And if someone uses this logo lets say producing a crap watch with the rolex logo on it. Then the producer will be sued by the copyright owner.
2.) The copyright owner of the photo. He took the picture, so its his right to decide who is going to use it. And if and what he will charge the user for the usage of the picture. Or do you think for examples photographers making pictures for Singapore Airlines for a marketing folder are making this for free just because the SQ logo is on the damned picture they took?? (replae SQ with any other brand).

Yes its a hobby, BUT if someone uses my pictures the least he should do is ask for permission. If he doesnt, well then its the photographers right to forbid the user the usage of the pictures.

To follow your McDonalds example: If its my photo i see then yes they have to pay. If the newspaper doesnt want to pay i am sure thy could ask McDonalds for some free press material.

Peter
P.S.: I am eagerly waiting on Mr. Mogrens comment on this Big grin
-
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 2:35 am

Yeah Peter, I sent them an invoice they wont forget very soon.

The comment from lx is just too tiresome to comment..
/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 4:01 am

Couple off examples:

You have a Giant bicycle, and you are very proud of it, you take a photo of the thing. Giant can sue you???? don't think so.

I can think of more, but I don't feel like putting them here, too tiring indeed...


Wietse
Wietse de Graaf
 
Ljungdahl
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 2:10 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 4:19 am

Correct, Lx-Maria, you can't have the copyright of something you don't own yourself! You're completely right about that!

But, of course, as I'm the owner of my (own) photos, I have also the copyright!

Lx-Maria (are your real name Maria??), of course you're free to have whatever opinion you like about this, but the international laws and regulations about copyright issues do NOT agree with the opinions you've stated in this forum, they are very clear about that.

Johan Smile
 
mirage
Posts: 3612
Joined: Mon May 31, 1999 4:44 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 4:45 am

Any photo as a "creation" blongs to the photographer, the person who made it.

I'm not sure about what I'll say now and maybe I get some hard replies but I'll say it, trying to continue a serious discussion.

In my country, singers and bands must pay to the authors association to get the "copyright" and be able to display on CD's the watermark "Copyright.....".

In your countries it's the same? Can this be also applied to photography? I mean, the photo is our creation, it belongs to us, but folowing the legislation do we have the "Copyright"?

just asking opinions...

Luis
 
Alaskaairlines
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 12:28 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 12:02 pm

Good question Luis. Lets hear what the others have to say.



-Dmitry
 
gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 2:58 pm

Luis, I don't know exactly, how it works in Protugal, but I guess, it's the same as here in Switzerland.

A band can register a song by sending it (music and lyrics) to SUISA, an association, which handles all copyright issues. As a musician, I can put a Copyright mark wherever I want, even without registering it at SUISA, but if a another musician copies my song and sends it to SUISA, he will be the legitimal copyright holder, as I don't have a prove, that the song belongs to me.

It's different for fotographers. An example: if I go to a professional photographer to mae a protrait, and I pay for it, I only recieve a copy, but not the original negative or slide. The photographer is then the holder of the copyright, without paying anything to anyone.

Saludos
Gerardo
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
 
da Fwog
Posts: 845
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 1999 5:25 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 3:01 pm

Luis,

as the photographer, as soon as I take the photograph, it automatically becomes my copyrighted work. I do not have to assert my copyright (for example, by putting a copyright message on it) for this to be the case - it is automatic.

An example: there was a case I heard about in the UK a few years ago where a man took his film to a photo shop to get it developed. The shop thought his photos were particularly good, and used one of them, without his permission, and before he had even seen the results, in their advertising display in the shop (showing what sizes of enlargements you could have made from your negatives). He successfully sued the shop for use of his copyrighted work without permission - because as soon as he took the photograph it became his intellectual property.

To anyone who doesn't understand what the fuss is all about: copyright is a way of protecting your intellectual property. If music was not copyrighted, artists would not be able to make a living from it, because (forget about home taping and copying of CDs here) any company who wanted to could LEGALLY press as many bootleg copies of any CD they wanted and sell them for whatever they liked, thus removing the ability of the record company to generate royalties for the artist. Lest we forget, there are many people who make their living from photography, and they need exactly the same sort of protection. Yes, for myself, and many others, this is a hobby. But that still doesn't mean someone can lift my photos and use them without my permission. THEY don't know whether I am an amateur or a pro - for all they know, it could be my main source of income!
 
LX-Maria
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 6:44 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 5:34 pm

Ok, I got the picture.

It's all about money.
So when you see your photo at 3x2 cm on a screen, you start screaming about copyright.

Jeezus; i thought you all loved aviation.

My father started 35 years ago; he already took me with him when i was 2 years old; never asked a dime for a photo. Just making a huge collection and exchanging with friends.

But maybe i'm the exception in the spotters-world because i'm female.
On the otherhand, i'm a lucky person to have the cockpit as my daily office; so no frustration about only shooting photos for money.

MM
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 5:51 pm

Maria, think of it this way:

What would happen to all the professional photographers (the ones making a living from it) if other people (hobby photographers) were giving away their photos for free? They'd be put out of business and a result would be that the quality of the work would go down and down and down, since the good guys had to do something else for a living.

Now since you are a professional pilot, what do you think about all your fellow pilots who work for free, or sometimes even pay to work as a first officer? How does that affect you? Does your employer have to cut your salary in order to compete with the not-so-serious airlines?

Think about it...
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Topic Author
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 6:19 pm

It has nothing to do with loving aviation or not or with your gender.
Its simple the fact that people take things which doesn't belong to them and use them. What would you call that process in one word????
Peter
-
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 6:24 pm

Theft perhaps?
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 6:28 pm

 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 7:04 pm

Lx-maria aka MM implies she works as a pilot.

I think she would think very differently if we all had pilots licences with type ratings and we offered to fly for airlines for free.

MM - with respect, you have no idea which of us are professional photographers who earn a living from this game, and those of us who are amateurs who are still greatful for some contributions (or at least courtessy) to help contribute to the cost of taking these photographs. If someone doesn't ask, they're stealing our work, just like a pilot offering to fly for free would be stealing yours.

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
tsentsan
Posts: 1921
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:48 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 7:51 pm

Could I just ask a question here? I dont mean to be rude to anyone.

If you take a picture of an airline, and its a superb picture, and as Da fwog said, the copyright belongs to him. Then you get make quite a sum of money using that picture. Would it be possible that the airline and airplane manufacturer come to you, and demand money from you because its a copyright of their logo/airframe too? I'm not too familiar with this idea, so please pardon my ignorance.

Thanks
NO URLS in signature
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 9:20 pm

Tsentsan, they are more than happy to have it on your photo, it will only get huge ammounts of attention, ie advertising.

Wietse
Wietse de Graaf
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 9:32 pm

Tsentsan - no problem, in effect the logo on the aircraft is in the public domain. In general there are no restrictions on your photographing anything on public display - even people. However in the case of people, there are restrictions on how that photo may be used depending on circumstances.

The only time an airline may have a case against you is if you took a picture on private property where photographic access has been banned.

LX - yes, it can look a bit petty at times. However

1 - many of us are quite happy to allow free use of a picture in certain situations - we just like to be asked! It is not just about money. There are organisations which I would never want my images to be associated with (eg. Nikon  Smile ), and, as the photographer I have the right to control how my image is used.

2 - unfortunately, camera and film companies don't offer discounts to those who do not make a living from photography (perversly, it tends to be the other way round). I, for one, could not afford to continue my current level of photography (in terms of both quantity and quality) without some financial return. While there may be some grey areas, I certainly draw the line at a company profiting from my work at my expense!

3 - being a hobbyist should not mean being unprofessional in terms of quality and handling of your work. I use "professional" in the sense of an attitude to ones own work - this includes having a sense of the value of your work, and treating other photographers (including pros) with respect. It is unprofessional, in my opinion, to devalue your own work - and the work of others - by indiscriminately giving pictures away


Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
KingWide
Posts: 698
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 7:30 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Tue May 14, 2002 9:45 pm

[based on UK copyright law]

This issue is actually a little more complex. A company that owns the trade-mark can actually make a case to prevent me from using it if I use it in a way which is deemed to conflict with their trade-mark, brand, or is impinging on the market they're in. For example, if I sell a picture of an AA tail to UA and they use it in a series of adverts about why they're better than AA then AA can sue UA for infringing their rights by using the shot. If a component company, say Thales, uses the shot to illustrate how good their kit is and that AA use it in their aircraft, or whatever, then AA would have less of a case since their brand is not being meterially damaged by use of the photo.

This only applies to advertising and PR type uses, it does not apply to editorial use. A shot of an AA plane used to illustrate a 9/11 story could not be similarly challenged by AA.

For shots which might be destined for advertising markets, the concept of a model-release was developed where the model, or in this case the owner of the property, signs to indicate their assent that the image can be used in specified markets without restriction. Model releases can be totally open, as many are, or restrictive such as a release to use to advertise any product EXCEPT dog food, say. It's important to remember here that you, the photographer, are never liable for someone else's trademark infringement. If I sell UA a shot to use in an advert and they use it to knock AA, UA are the guys who receieve the lawyer's letter, not the photographer.

This idea of companies being able to charge me for making money from a picture containing their trademark just doesn't stand up to analysis, both casual and in court, because

1) the object is on public display.
2) the picture does not sell because of the trademark, it sells because it is a picture of an object,in this case a plane, whether it includes one or more trademarks is irrelevant in this instance.


J
Jason Taperell - AirTeamImages
 
tsentsan
Posts: 1921
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:48 pm

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Wed May 15, 2002 12:08 am

Wietse and Colin,

Kewl~! I thought it happened all in a vicious cycle, and airline would only be happy if you gave it to them for their use too  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Very interesting!

Thanks again
Tsentsan
NO URLS in signature
 
mirage
Posts: 3612
Joined: Mon May 31, 1999 4:44 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Wed May 15, 2002 3:55 am

Thanks for the comments Gerardo and Chris. Sometimes I feel like walking on a swamp when trying to understand the copyright laws wich are not so simple as it may look. It's good to have other opinions on these matter.

Luis
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Wed May 15, 2002 5:12 pm

Luis - of course they're not simple - lawyers have to eat you know (or so I'm told)  Smile

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
LX-Maria
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 6:44 pm

To Mogren; Let's Talk Business

Wed May 15, 2002 6:10 pm

Ok,
A lot of arguments have persuaded me you have the right to ask money.
So, let's talk business.

What would anybody charge for the use of your photo on that site ? (2x3cm)

to Jan Mogren; What would you charge them for your photo then ?

Is 100$ fair for the use of your photo ?

Greetings
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: To Mogren; Let's Talk Business

Wed May 15, 2002 6:43 pm

I think the price set depends on a number of circumstances - the request may be for a one off use, or it may be for use on a number of current or potential documents/websites.

Most requests I get are usually along the line of "can we use your picture on our website" - seldom will I receive details of exactly HOW it is to be used on the site, so the size issue is really irrelevant - I send a file, and its up to the customer to decide sizing and positioning.

Other factors might include the rarity of the image and whether or not exclusive and/or distribution rights are required.

I'm sure we've all underpriced on some deals and overpriced (and lost the sale!) on others.

Cheers.

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Copyright Issue Again?

Wed May 15, 2002 8:34 pm

Lx-maria,
that is way below what I normally charge.
/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests