Legality and practicality of using random web pictures on your website?

[Messiah Khan]

If you don't like it, don't circulate your stuff - you want to control how people view what you create? I suppose you buy all your cds and DVD and have a little shrine to Metallica as well... I bet you set fire to your copies of Napster

So by posting images on websites, photographers should expect their work to be stolen? Thats like saying that drivers should expect their cars to be stolen if they park on the street. Just because its easily done and its widespread does not make it right or legal. If I found someone using any of my photographs without my permission, I would come down on them as hard as I could.

 

[cleanbluesky]

Agreed. Unfortunately theres been a few times that this certainly hasnt been adhered to on this forum (posting private pics and copyright works with gleeful abandon) and its a public forum...surprised moderators dont seem to be aware of the legal ramifications. A lot of people just ignore copyright regulations because they think they wont get caught....shame that people think that way. What i mean is they have no respect for individuals and their right to privacy/copyrighted works etc.

Two points

1) Obviously if no legal action has been taken then the 'legal ramifications' are abstract

2) If anyone here wants to add anything further about the idea of copyright violation being cast in stone, please also sign off with the honest declaration that you have never violated copyright

 

[nin9abadga]

there are plenty of free "stock image" or even paid for image sites you can get stuff from which are generally free to use depending on the type of work you're undertaking. there's another forum i look at that's banned users posting pictures of footballers due to the forum being threatened with action due to copyright infringement. saying that though users always used to post link to live football streams so i suppose that's why they were on the radar.

 

[cleanbluesky]

So by posting images on websites, photographers should expect their work to be stolen? Thats like saying that drivers should expect their cars to be stolen if they park on the street. Just because its easily done and its widespread does not make it right or legal.

Learn to interpret written information properly, then come back.

If I found someone using any of my photographs without my permission, I would come down on them as hard as I could.

You mean you'd send them a stiff e-mail if you could find their e-mail address?

Have you ever violated copyright?


Moral whingers agitate me, puffing their chest out to suggest they have mighty standards without taking a look at the simple practicalities of the situation.

 

[cleanbluesky]

there are plenty of free "stock image" or even paid for image sites you can get stuff from which are generally free to use depending on the type of work you're undertaking. there's another forum i look at that's banned users posting pictures of footballers due to the forum being threatened with action due to copyright infringement. saying that though users always used to post link to live football streams so i suppose that's why they were on the radar.

Care to link?

 

[nin9abadga]

the main one i use is Stock.XCHNG - http://www.sxc.hu/ you'll need to register but downloads are unlimited and the license stuff is next to each image.

 

[cleanbluesky]

the main one i use is Stock.XCHNG - http://www.sxc.hu/ you'll need to register but downloads are unlimited and the license stuff is next to each image.

Thank you kindly

 

[Surfer]

No I'm advocating a complex philosophical discussion of 'rights' and the tangibility of enforcing copyright in a digital world... which seems to have gone above your head if you think I am endorsing copyright theft.

I'm also willing to bet that no-one here who is waxing lyrical about how copyright violation is BBBAAADDD M-KAY isn't guilty of it themselves

CBS learn the difference between a question and a statement. Mine was a question, therefore dont get all defensive or imagine an insult where none exists.

I work in copyright for the NHS so i have to make myself aware or i'd be in deep trouble...

 

[Messiah Khan]

Learn to interpret written information properly, then come back.

I can "interpret written information properly" thank you. You might want to work on your personal skills though.

You mean you'd send them a stiff e-mail if you could find their e-mail address?

I would go as far as I possibly could. If I managed to find out the name/address etc of the person then I wouldn't hesitate to take legal proceedings where applicable.

Have you ever violated copyright?

Im sure I have, but I try and avoid it where possible and certainly don't advocate it like you seem to be.

Moral whingers agitate me, puffing their chest out to suggest they have mighty standards without taking a look at the simple practicalities of the situation.

Why are you getting so agressive about the situation? People have simply suggested that you will need to gain permission of the photographer/owner if the copyright information doesn't specify that it can be used.

 

[G|mp]

Im sure the CBS here and the CBS over "there" are 2 completely different people

 

[Surfer]

You mean you'd send them a stiff e-mail if you could find their e-mail address?

Have you ever violated copyright?


Moral whingers agitate me, puffing their chest out to suggest they have mighty standards without taking a look at the simple practicalities of the situation.

No CBS what would happen is the host site (isp) gets a letter/email asking them kindly to remove the offending material. If they dont then it goes further and possibly leads to the hosting site being shut down (at least temporarily)

You should know all this - but you seem to be in an agitated mood today.

 

[Sic]

It's generally not considered good "netiquette" (ugh) to leech images from other people's sites. It is possible to put measures in place so that this doesn't happen, from the owner of the copyright's point of view. That's not to say there's anything they can do to stop you downloading the image and re-hosting it without their permission. The only way you're allowed to use it is if you ask and they say yes.

as has been suggested, sxc and the like are good places to get images if you don't want to pay.

 

[DavidB]

Think its just good practice to ask, i dont think its really similar to compare it to something like music copyright infringement, as its much more specific.

Your effectively stealing straight from the photographer, rather than a big faceless company(thats budgeted for it), just seems morally worse.

 

[cleanbluesky]

Your effectively stealing straight from the photographer, rather than a big faceless company(thats budgeted for it), just seems morally worse.

No theft is involved, because no-one is being deprived of a resource. Back to this issue later - I'm off

One of the reasons that I believe that copyright enforcement isn't anywhere near as clear cut is because of the amount of music that goes around. Artists seem to think they are being cheated should anyone want to listen to their music without following strict instructions to do so - it is an affront to art, it is an affront to goodwill.

There is no way to stop a person using music, an image and unless they are passing it off as their own or using it to make money whilst depriving the artist then it should be taken

Music is largely recycled, and no photographer would like it if architects, car designers, models and people took the same attitude as they do with regards to their photos. What if you had to seek a landowners permission before photographing anything on their land, what about the council or even the government?

Art is the depiction of beauty, and no-one can or should own beauty. If you're a photographer and wish to stamp on the creative right of others to appreciate your material in the way they consider appropriate, you are a scrooge and your heart isn't in it.

As long as no-one is making money from your efforts and they aren't passing it off as their own, then you should WANT to see your work shared.

 

[Sic]

As long as no-one is making money from your efforts and they aren't passing it off as their own, then you should WANT to see your work shared.

the operative word there is 'see'. If you don't ask someone/tell them that you're using it then they'll never get to see it in use. From my point of view, if someone wanted to use a photo I'd taken, I wouldn't care as long as they told me they were going to and weren't making out like it was their work.

 

[GeX]

If you don't like it, don't circulate your stuff - you want to control how people view what you create? I suppose you buy all your cds and DVD and have a little shrine to Metallica as well... I bet you set fire to your copies of Napster

hey mate, if you don't like - go take your own ****ing pictures.

copyright issue asside, it's just rude.