next »

[dirk septer]

Since I never got a straight answer on my question I previously posted under the topic "posting historic photographs" and the topic drifted away in the misc. replies, on the suggestion of the webmaster I start it as a new topic:

Here is my original question:

Policy re: posting (and claiming) other people's photographs" I quote web master Ken Smith:

"Where commercial rights are believed to be breached, images are removed and can only be reinstated where specific permission can be shown."

"Where a specific non-commercial copyright claim is made by another member or from elsewhere the image is categorised "Copyright Questionable" and a prompt check made before deletion."

"Other "non-member" photos are accepted at face value - they should either indicate the original photographer or, for those where that is not possible, explain the provenance.  Some of these are investigated either specifically or on a random basis, and action is taken as appropriate."

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1653526

Now, taking this interesting historic photograph of liner-troopship-liner Tegelberg taken in 1939;
(claimed as his own by member who posted it!), should be deleted according to rules quoted above.

BTW: This Tegelberg photo and all others of same vessel show the wrong IMO as well (5354391 >> 5535439).

There are many more that should be deleted according to the rules. This would be a real loss.

So, instead of deleting them, why not just leaving them and quoting these as "photographer: unknown"

[ChasB46]

By statute you cannot say photographer unknown. By the date of photo taken that photographer may possibly be alive and unless he died within a year of taking it (70 years UK) nobody other than the photographer has any right to display it unless it was left as an inheritance or has he written agreement /evidence that the right was transferred. Word of mouth is not sufficient. If you buy a picture/slide etc. from a stall that does not give you the copyright. Where did the stall holder get it?
The person uploading and Shipspotting would both be liable. You might be prepared to take the risk but would Shipspotting.com? Historic (famous) or not has no relevance.

[Kyle Stubbs]

Dirk, the "Photographer" subject on each photo is nothing but a username,  and likely has no legal binding.  Copyright law should only be concerned about whether the individual "owner" of the account attached to said username has permission to publish the photo, regardless of what username they use.

If photos were stripped of a username, which is essentially what I believe you are proposing, then it would be assumed that the copyright belongs to the owner of the site. I am sure the owner does not want to assume that liability.

[davidships]

1) There is no possibility of disassociating any photo from the member that that uploaded it.  That is a fundamental for any site like Shipspotting that provides a platform for members to upload their own galleries.  I do not believe that this is misleading when the member has added information in the same "Photo Details" field about the identity or provenance of the image.  Nevertheless, to remove any lingering ambiguity I could contemplate replacing "Photographer" with "Member"

2) Shipspotting.com has never, to my knowledge, claimed or implied any copyright in relation to member-generated input, whether it be photographs or text, and I am sure that it will not do so.

3) @Dirk: you forgot to add the text after "Here is my original question:"

What is the policy on posting historic photographs?
If the vessel is not actually spotted/photographed by a certain member,
should this still qualify to be posted on a site by the name shipspotting?
If historic photos taken by others can be posted, is it kosher that
the member posts these under his own name?

You were asking about policy, and in reply you were pointed to the formal established policy, to which I (not the late Ken Smith) added the note you quote, indicating, in as straight-forward a way as I could, how this is generally applied at present.

David

PS The LR unique number for TEGELBERG was 535439 which, when correctly converted to 7-digit format, as subsequently adopted by the IMO) becomes 5354391, which is what we use. 5535439 has never been its LR number - it was invented by another organisation for its internal purposes, though no longer used there either.  Please PM me if you need further explanation.

[dirk septer]

Perfect: replacing "photographer" with "member" is easy to do, and will solve this issue!

best wishes for 2021 as well....

Dirk

[teachers]

Hi Dirk and David,

I think that is the answer, i could not agree more.

If this is so easy to do as Dirk claims, then you might consider, posted by, instead.

regards,
David.

[dirk septer]

Another site where I post some of my photographs requires a confirmation
of copyright ownership; otherwise the photos won't be posted.

In our case this could easily be done as well:

to the Agreement box at the bottom, just add three words"

change "I accept the terms....." to "I OWN THE COPYRIGHT and accept the terms.....".

Of course everybody automatically clicks OKay on this box, and nobody really cares,
but in this way at least all legal bases are covered.....

[ChasB46]

suitable wording added on lines of - any infringement then they and their photos will be removed from site for ever. Otherwise statement will just abused.

[3SX]

Currently situation looks so, the site Members are not obliged to follow the site Terms & Conditions, despite on the fact they indicate agreed with the rules. Some Members breeching the site rules years by years.

The site standard terms:
http://www.shipspotting.com/about/terms.php
When uploading, members must comply with copyright law. Post only photographs for which you have copyright ownership. Other people's slides or negatives can only be used if their name and permission is stated in the description. No scans of ship photographs from publications are allowed. Any member posting photos or images in breech of copyright will have their membership cancelled.

Despite on clear site standards still welcome many photos made by other people's with NO PERMISSION to publish i.e. with some unclear remarks :

.- photo made by name/surname
.- photo made by somebody (crew member, worker etc.)
.- online museum photos

All this remarks mean the photo is published without permission of author, but accepted by the site/Admins, is it to the site responsibility?

[simonwp]

The problem with this solution is, anyone could put "Photograph taken by M. Mouse, and posted with permission". Admin's have no means of checking if M. Mouse has given their permission or not.

This whole area is a minefield for websites like this, and wider social media. The difference seems to be, that on this website it seems to get members agitated far more than on some others. A lot of members seem to be worried about other members possibly posting photographs for which they do not have permission, even though it does not directly affect them. But what if M. Mouse has given permission.....how does the member prove this. It works both ways.

I rarely post on her now, partly due to this issue, but also due to some trivial deletions, like the top 1/2 inch of a mast being cropped off. Posting on here under a user name also has it's issues. I post on other social media sites under my own name, not my Shipspotting user name, and am frequently accused of stealing my own photographs. If I don't post on here the issue doesn't arise. There appears to be no facility to change user name.

[3SX]

The problem with this solution is, anyone could put "Photograph taken by M. Mouse, and posted with permission". Admin's have no means of checking if M. Mouse has given their permission or not.

Once posted with a Permission - OK, that's Member's responsibility unless discovered other, but on the site are thousands photos without a permission i.e. "Photograph taken by M. Mouse".

just few examples
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=3246639
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=3246582
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=3246552
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=3244539

In every case the Member very clever describe - he has NO permission for publishing, but photos well located on the site.

[simonwp]

That's the point isn't it......if the poster had put "with permission of" you'd have been happy, but you wouldn't know if they had permission or not. The whole thing is meaningless because anyone could put anything, as it's impossible to check and police.

[simonwp]

An interesting point has been raised during a discussion regarding this in photographs comments. What national juristriction does this site come under for copyright law??? A poster from Russia has pointed out that copyright law in that country is significantly different to many others, and that may be true of other countries. Is it the law of the country of the poster, or that of the website that takes primacy??

[Tuomas Romu]

A poster from Russia has pointed out that copyright law in that country is significantly different to many others...

In Russia, the "problem" is not the copyright law itself but how (little) intellectual property rights such as copyright are respected not only among the online community, but also in business etc.

I think Shipspotting.com Copyright Policy is rather clear with this respect. However, should it be revised to better address the potential issue?

Jump to: Please select a destination: ----------------------------- Shipspotters all over the world ----------------------------- => Shipping News and information => Trip reports => Scale Models => Site related news, functions and modules => Help and Advice => Consultations and review of site standards