Author Topic: Stolen photos  (Read 20265 times)

Offline Chris Howell

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,524
    • View Profile
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #15 on: December 22, 2009, 02:09:16 AM »
Re Jorgen Lonn negatives

As mentioned I swapped negatives for slides, plus sent modern photos CD's for his collection.
I was not aware he has a business, but in view of the adverse comments  I will not now post any of the negatives exchanged.
Sadly a few petty people will stop many members seeing ships that are worth looking at, far better to have 300 of the same containership or bulk carrier on the site !
Notes on album
1. All postings are photography of Chris Howell except where stated taken from 1972 to date.
2. Photographs taken by others are credited as owned collection and photographers name where known and I own the copyright or the person mentioned in the text.

Offline Cornelia Klier

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,881
    • View Profile
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #16 on: December 22, 2009, 03:35:28 PM »
Hello,

well I have written two e-mails to Jorgen Lonn regarding the photos.

Telling him, that I am the copyright holder. Telling him, that my photos are for his personal collection, but not for anyone else. As well saying, if he does post them on any forum or such, then he must always give "Copyright Cornelia Klier" not his name...
Photos sale is not allowed, in such case the person should contact me direct and I'll see.

I have NOT RECEIVED AN ANSWER !!

This is very surprising because when first he asked for photos, he asked - not just once ! When I wrote an answer, that he will get the CD soon, he always immediatelly sent back an e-mail.

But now, when I want him to confirm the above  - SILENCE !

I think, this is not a very good sign.

Many nice people with whom exhcanging photos is a good thing to do, but once in a while one can find a rotten egg as well it seems..

Offline Hans Neren

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #17 on: December 22, 2009, 04:02:01 PM »
The same day as I started this tread, Jorgen sent me an E-male were he explained that hi doesn't exchanges photos no more. I have seen him want to change photos on the r Internet for a long time now,  some years ago when hi did send me a mail that he got lots of Johnson Line photos for me if I did send him my
:hammer:

Guest

  • Guest
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #18 on: December 22, 2009, 06:13:35 PM »
Quote

CJHBLUFF wrote:
Sadly a few petty people will stop many members seeing ships that are worth looking at, far better to have 300 of the same containership or bulk carrier on the site !


Hey, thanks for the Xmas spirit - I simply passed on my thoughts - it is for the Owner of the Site to say if he is prepared to potentially break copyright by allowing photographs to be posted.

This site is quite right in shouting LOUD when its members photographs are used without permission, so it surely cannot be seen to be dealing in double standards.

Regards

Guest

  • Guest
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #19 on: December 22, 2009, 06:15:27 PM »
Quote

COKL wrote:
Hello,

well I have written two e-mails to Jorgen Lonn regarding the photos.

Telling him, that I am the copyright holder. Telling him, that my photos are for his personal collection, but not for anyone else. As well saying, if he does post them on any forum or such, then he must always give "Copyright Cornelia Klier" not his name...
Photos sale is not allowed, in such case the person should contact me direct and I'll see.

I have NOT RECEIVED AN ANSWER !!

This is very surprising because when first he asked for photos, he asked - not just once ! When I wrote an answer, that he will get the CD soon, he always immediatelly sent back an e-mail.

But now, when I want him to confirm the above  - SILENCE !

I think, this is not a very good sign.

Many nice people with whom exhcanging photos is a good thing to do, but once in a while one can find a rotten egg as well it seems..



Probably a case of deal with this gentleman at your peril  :-o

Regards

Offline Hans Neren

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #20 on: December 22, 2009, 06:24:35 PM »
""""Sadly a few petty people"""
Is I one of them?
Hasse.
:hammer:

Bob Scott

  • Guest
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #21 on: December 22, 2009, 07:18:58 PM »
CJHBLUFF wrote:
Sadly a few petty people will stop many members seeing ships that are worth looking at, far better to have 300 of the same containership or bulk carrier on the site !


If expressing concern about copyright abuses and photo theft is being petty, then I am ready to stand up and be counted as one of the petty few!

Offline Kelvin Davies

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,649
    • View Profile
    • http://kelvindavies.co.uk/
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #22 on: December 22, 2009, 07:38:14 PM »
Bob,
You are right.
I am not sure about Chris's point; nobody is stopping anybody from seeing any photos.
If Chris has photos he owns, the choice is his whether to post or not post.
Kelvin

Offline Cornelia Klier

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,881
    • View Profile
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #23 on: December 22, 2009, 08:53:42 PM »
by BobS on 2009/12/22 13:18:58

CJHBLUFF wrote:
Sadly a few petty people will stop many members seeing ships that are worth looking at, far better to have 300 of the same containership or bulk carrier on the site !


If expressing concern about copyright abuses and photo theft is being petty, then I am ready to stand up and be counted as one of the petty few!

QUOTING BOB S:

I think, the discussion above is not so much about people like CJHBLUFF who do deliberately give away their copyright, or are very generous with it. This is fine, of course and good with all.

The dicussion is about people who receive photos in exchange and their lack of respecting copyright by peope who are not willing to give away photos for free use, but who say, like me - use for personal collection, if other please give copyright "photo taken by"..

I think, many users - most of them, do respect such, and I have given photos to some, and as well received some, that are only for my private use, not to be put anywhere on a forum or so.
It is a matter of trust for me, not to give any photos further, and if I dare to, I'd always ask ! If I don't know who - I don't.

This is the problem with Jorgen Lonn, he seems not to be interested in this, and not answering mails in which asking him to respect that.

Offline polsteam

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 815
    • View Profile
    • http://ships.greenet.pl/photo
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #24 on: December 25, 2009, 01:05:40 PM »
"petty" (in the case of the problem discussed in this thread) means "honest" or "decent" or "not supporting double standards"

then I am happy to be "petty"
despite using "polsteam" for my nick I have NO personal (professional) or business connections with the company of the same name

Offline polsteam

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 815
    • View Profile
    • http://ships.greenet.pl/photo
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #25 on: December 25, 2009, 01:13:58 PM »
I have a collection of prints resulting from 1 to 1 exchange several years ago.

I would NEVER think of posting them on the Web (even if I know the name of the Author and could put this name in the caption of photo) without asking for and receiving permission to publish...


---------


many of you, participating in this thread, are messing up some concepts and definitions...

Copyright is NOT transferrable.
Copyright ALWAYS stays with the author of photo or a book or a film, or any other work.

What MAY BE transferrable is so called Publishright.

Publishright (Publishing rights) is not (the same as) Copyright.


If you buy negatives or prints from someone it DOES NOT mean that you actually automatically buy also Publishright.

That Publishright is transferred in full or in part to the current holder (buyer) of the work (negatives, prints, etc,) must be stated clearly in a contract / agreement between the buyer of work (prints, negatives, etc.) and the seller (usually author).
It MUST BE clearly stated in sale/purchase agreement on paper.

If you buy negatives and prints from someone you CANNOT publish them under your own name at any circumstances. Copyrigh always stays with the Author of work.

If the sale/purchase agreement (regarding the negatives, prints, etc.) states that clearly (allows for that) - you may publish these works, but not under your own name.

Whether it is allowed (according to law) to publish under "from the collection [buyer of prints]" - that would have to be consulted with a lawyer.
But in my opinion it would be highly inappropriate and not ethical, not fair to hide the name of the actual Author of the work (the Copyright holder) and "cover" it under the formula "from the collection [name of the buyer of prints]"...

It would be fair to publish such photos under the formula: "Photo by [Author's bame] from the collection of [name of the buyer of prints]". Of course, providing the publisher has the agreement which clearly states that Publishing right is transferred in full or in part (allowing for such publication) to the holder (buyer) of works (negatives, prints).


Buying negatives or prints ALONE (without having a detailed agreement which states how, where and on what conditions or without conditions) certainly and undoubtely DOES NOT give right of the current holder of works (negatives, prints) to publish them.


Some participants in this thread try to "fool" others by a postulate "not to compare books with prints or negatives of photos"... - nothing more inappropriate.

Regarding the problem we are discussing here Publishing right for ship photo prints does not differ at all from publishing books or excerpts.

Buying negatives or prints is certainly NOT ENOUGH to have right to publish them. One must also have a publishing contract or agreement with "grant of rights" clause.


------------


The "grant of rights" clause in a publishing contract enumerates the specific rights granted by the author to the publisher. Negotiation of this clause continues to increase in importance as more uses are being developed for literary content. The scope of the author's grant may vary widely. For example, the grant of rights could be all inclusive - granting all the exclusive rights and interests in the author's work to the publisher, or the grant could be very narrow - only including a single specific use of the author's work, or the grant could be somewhere between these extremes. The crucial point, as it relates to the publisher, is that the publisher may only exploit those rights that have been specifically granted by the author because any exploitation of a right that was not granted by the author could place the publisher at risk for infringing the author's copyright.

In the event that there is ever a dispute over electronic rights, then the specific inclusion of electronic rights in the grant of rights clause, as well as a future technology clause, may be critical in determining the rights of the publisher and author with respect to the control of all or part of the electronic rights in the literary work.

Recommendation
If the publisher desires to control the electronic rights (this means also posting scans of negatives or prints on a website like shipspotting.com) in the author's work make certain that the publishing contract is very clear regarding the intent of the parties concerning the exploitation of these rights.
despite using "polsteam" for my nick I have NO personal (professional) or business connections with the company of the same name

Offline Tony des Landes

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,679
    • View Profile
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #26 on: December 25, 2009, 10:09:40 PM »
This is an extract from the Copyright Council of New Zealand.

[i]"Assigning or licensing copyright rights

As copyright owner, you can assign or license your copyright rights to another person.

By assigning copyright in a work, you are selling or transferring it to someone else and that other person becomes the copyright owner. An assignment of copyright should be in writing and signed by the person assigning copyright.

Copyright may also be transmitted to others on death of the copyright owner."
[/i]

Perhaps the law is different in New Zealand.

Tony d
...

Offline Cody Williams

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,118
    • View Profile
    • ~Ydoc~ on Flickr
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #27 on: December 25, 2009, 10:37:27 PM »
Quote
"Assigning or licensing copyright rights As copyright owner, you can assign or license your copyright rights to another person. By assigning copyright in a work, you are selling or transferring it to someone else and that other person becomes the copyright owner. An assignment of copyright should be in writing and signed by the person assigning copyright. Copyright may also be transmitted to others on death of the copyright owner."


As we know Jorgen Lonn send out these DVD's with images as apart of the exchange. The images he send would be pretty much the same for every recipient and that begs a question regarding copyright; can multiple people assume copyright of an image?

Offline Arnes

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,076
    • View Profile
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #28 on: December 26, 2009, 01:44:38 AM »
No Cody, a DVD is the same as a print, they can be multiplied.
This case is not about prints or DVD's, but who has the copyright of a photo; the photographer or the owner of the negative. That mean we also can exclude digital photographs, as it is negatives Chris is talking about.
I have been exchanging/buying negatives for more than 30 years now, and I will call the negatives I own for mine.
I've come over some of my own photos from photographers advertising in Marine News, stamped with copyright like A.Duncan. And I'm happy with this, they have got the negative from me, they own it, asd can use it like they want.
I also bought a batch of negatives from Airfoto after Mr.Foxley passed away, and his wife (I think) who took care of this, didn't know anything about copyrights. Now they are yours, you can use them as you like, she said. The funny thing is that Skyfotos/Fotoflite also bought a lot of negatives from them. And they sell them with "copyright by Fotoflite".
So according to Steve then good people like the late Mr. Duncan and companies like Fotoflite are criminals.

Regards, Arnes

Offline Cody Williams

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,118
    • View Profile
    • ~Ydoc~ on Flickr
Re: Stolen photos
« Reply #29 on: December 26, 2009, 02:20:48 AM »
Sorry Arnes, I meant to say / ask; Can multiple people have copyright of an image at the same time?

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk