Messages

16

Site related news, functions and modules / Re: posting and claiming other people's photographs

« on: December 26, 2020, 03:11:41 PM »

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

best wishes for 2021 as well....

Dirk

17

Site related news, functions and modules / posting and claiming other people's photographs

« on: December 24, 2020, 03:14:09 PM »

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"

18

Site related news, functions and modules / Re: posting historic photographs - policy question

« on: December 22, 2020, 02:59:54 AM »

Please refer to the topic: COLLECTIONS and UNKNOWN PHOTOGRAPHERS:

the current webmaster did agree with the statement of webmaster Ken Smith who noted there:

This question of uploading without any credit to the Author or Approval for use could have serious consequences for this website and I have a duty to protect the Website from any possible legal litigation, so with this in mind it has been decided that from today Tuesday Dec 10th 2013 all photographs uploaded to this website and not owned by the member will only be accepted if the Authors name and approval to use them is given with the photograph, "From My Collection" or "Unknown" will no longer be accepted and if uploaded as such they will be removed, I should also stress that if the details required are given and prove to be false then the member has to accept full responsibility, they have been accepted in good faith.

So to sum up, this Website was, and as far as I am concerned still is for uploading your Own photographs that are taken by you personally, obviously with its expansion it has rather drifted away a little from that principle but I would like to encourage a return to that idea for the future, we have plenty of homemade talent, let us make use of it.

Kind Regards
Ken Smith
Webmaster

Now, again refering to that 1939 photograph of liner-troopship_liner Tegelberg:

the member who posted this photo is NOT the photographer;
there is a big difference between "collection of" and "copyright."
there is no explanation about who took the photograph, nor whether the member
who posted the photo has the copyright.
was posted originally with the wrong IMO; and though this was pointed to poster,
who did acknowledge that comment, never even bothered fixing the mistake;
consequently, other photos of Tegelberg posted by other members also now show
the wrong IMO.

I understand the IT problem about the "photographer" but this can be improved in a
very simple manner by changing "Photographer:" to: "Photographer or poster:"
the poster will still have to explain the details re: copyright, etc.
"Collection of" does not mean anything.

And I totally agree with Ken Smith that the Shipspotting Website was, and as far as
he was concerned, still is for uploading member's own photographs that are taken by
them personally.

Maybe the time has come to return to our original roots and mission...

19

Site related news, functions and modules / Re: posting historic photographs - policy question

« on: December 21, 2020, 06:30:19 PM »

his name is entered as being the photographer, which he is/was not;

here as photographer should be entered "unknown."

This is what webmaster Ken Smith wrote on December 20, 2013: (especially note his last paragraph):

There has been a recent increase in the number of photographs of older ships uploaded to the website under the heading of "From My Collection" also seen is "Photographer Unknown" or quite often nothing to indicate the author of the original but from the photograph it is obvious it was not taken by the member who uploaded it and that it has been acquired or purchased even maybe copied from another source.

If a photograph is uploaded as such then it can be considered as Copyright Infringement and this Website has very clear rules on this and they are laid out in "Uploading Photos Guidance" Rule 7 clearly states "When uploading Members must comply with the Copyright Law". the rules also state that if you are uploading photographs not taken by you then you must give the Authors name and that you have approval to use them, this information must be given with an uploaded photograph, sadly this is not always the case and no credit is given.

We do have members uploading to the Website photographs that they do not own, I will not name them but you will know who I am referring to, I can assure you and they can confirm that they have been thoroughly checked for authenticity of the information they give, I have insisted that they do this for the credibility of this website so they are not affected by this decision, the details they provide with their uploads have been approved.

This question of uploading without any credit to the Author or Approval for use could have serious consequences for this website and I have a duty to protect the Website from any possible legal litigation, so with this in mind it has been decided that from today Tuesday Dec 10th 2013 all photographs uploaded to this website and not owned by the member will only be accepted if the Authors name and approval to use them is given with the photograph, "From My Collection" or "Unknown" will no longer be accepted and if uploaded as such they will be removed, I should also stress that if the details required are given and prove to be false then the member has to accept full responsibility, they have been accepted in good faith.

So to sum up, this Website was, and as far as I am concerned still is for uploading your Own photographs that are taken by you personally, obviously with its expansion it has rather drifted away a little from that principle but I would like to encourage a return to that idea for the future, we have plenty of homemade talent, let us make use of it.

Kind Regards
Ken Smith
Webmaster

20

Site related news, functions and modules / Re: posting historic photographs - policy question

« on: December 21, 2020, 03:41:45 PM »

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 (false claims are rare, but not unknown).

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;
(even 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"

21

Site related news, functions and modules / Re: posting historic photographs - policy question

« on: December 18, 2020, 10:10:09 PM »

Personally I don't think members should not even post/be allowed to post photos that are not their own. After all, this site is called SHIPSPOTTERS..... Other people's photos have nothing to do with shipspotting.

To post historic photos not taken by themselves could be posted under a separate category "historic photographs," with the name of the photographer, or when this is not known just a simple "unknown."

22

Site related news, functions and modules / posting historic photographs - policy question

« on: December 18, 2020, 03:42:20 PM »

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?

23

Shipping News and information / Re: MV Schiedyk, sunk off Vancouver Island, 3Jan1968 leaking fuel

« on: December 12, 2020, 05:27:46 AM »

https://www.hakaimagazine.com/features/the-tale-of-dirty-old-leaky-zalinski/?fbclid=IwAR3P6dPuT9GBOT7R7IhxFnvPOVa1y_1ldfQJnQvJ2wsWdu0-wS5lSYTbKZc

24

Shipping News and information / MV Schiedyk, sunk off Vancouver Island, 3Jan1968 leaking fuel

« on: December 12, 2020, 04:30:11 AM »

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/shipwreck-discovered-in-bc-zuciarte-shannel-bligh-island-nootka-sound-1.5838352?fbclid=IwAR2MV5CS_KIFdTHHoTDVJnMAT7JxnbQymPiJz1oDQG_78LkXv8I6vdGEph8#:~:text=0-,The%20MV%20Schiedyk%20is%20leaking%20oil%20into,of%20a%20provincial%20marine%20park&text=An%20oily%20sheen%20from%20the,Bligh%20Island%20in%20late%202020.&text=Fisheries%20and%20Oceans%20Canada%20said,old%20fuel%20into%20the%20sea.

25

Site related news, functions and modules / Re: change "Ships under Repair or Conversion" category

« on: August 08, 2020, 02:43:47 AM »

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1497733

and a fishing vessel like Misty Michelle up in the Canadian Arctic only has a very short
time each summer being in the water (note: photo taken in June with the bay still covered
in ice) and spends every year most of the time on land in storage, should certainly no be
classified "Under Repair or Conversion," rather just what she is: a "Fishing Vessel."

26

Site related news, functions and modules / Re: change "Ships under Repair or Conversion" category

« on: August 08, 2020, 02:28:30 AM »

I find it very annoying when the photo category of a photograph posted is being arbitrarily changed by Shipspotting to basically an incorrect category.

A fishing vessel is still a fishing vessel, whether in the water or outside the water;

if and when out of the water, it should not automatically become classified as "Ship Under Repair or Conversion" when it is actually out of the water, say to be temporarily stored, in transit, or waiting to be broken up.

Example of the latter: Duncan Scott, waiting to be broken up:

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=2587103

this vessel certainly is NOT "Under Repair or Conversion"

27

Site related news, functions and modules / Re: Is there a site problem?

« on: July 20, 2020, 12:32:11 PM »

"error 28 from storage engine" is back again.....

unable to access: "comments to my photos."

28

Shipping News and information / Re: Carnival ship sales

« on: July 16, 2020, 02:24:11 AM »

Carnival Corporation Plc. also sold or is selling the Holland America Line vessels Amsterdam and Rotterdam: (to Fred Olsen as Bolette and Borealis):   https://cruiseharbournews.com/borealisbolette.html?fbclid=IwAR2FCnCv_eeGTZzPZQoVBd18acfOnC9Fp9pP_z52NkOC70Osi6yBtTkFkzg

29

Shipping News and information / Re: Royal Caribbean and Pullmantur disposals

« on: July 13, 2020, 11:20:00 PM »

Monarch Arrives In Aliaga For Scrapping

https://www.cruiseharbournews.com/monarchaliaga.html?fbclid=IwAR2zZeFpLKPJwnkbMLKYbaN868Hl41sKlMsXFPfPcwEcIYbOnooXh4k6Tik

30

Shipping News and information / Re: Royal Caribbean and Pullmantur disposals

« on: July 08, 2020, 02:05:08 AM »

Pullmantur Cruises Horizon arrived at Piraeus, Athens to be stripped of any valuable items.

http://www.cruiseharbournews.com/horizonpiraeus.html?fbclid=IwAR2AHididN9xCb_RmGiiQyehDEKXZubzituF67umVb-28T2WQ5pWfEvd5aQ