Copyrights
- Thread starter shemozzle999
- Start date
This bit is somewhat nonsensical though:
The court also said it is “of little importance” if the copyright holder does not limit “the ways in which the photograph may be used by internet users.”
If the copyright holder doesn't want or intend to prosecute, it becomes of prime importance since no case is possible.
All of my photography and web site materials are open source and no court can overrule that.
.
The court also said it is “of little importance” if the copyright holder does not limit “the ways in which the photograph may be used by internet users.”
If the copyright holder doesn't want or intend to prosecute, it becomes of prime importance since no case is possible.
All of my photography and web site materials are open source and no court can overrule that.
.
Maybe the court means that the photographer must explicitly allow usage - "not limiting" usage does not imply consent.
Yes that was their meaning, but their ruling "of little importance" is pointless. Lack of permission is of prime importance, since if the author doesn't bother to protect their work, it follows that they are very unlikely to take legal action to protect it later, having shown by the lack of any protection that they aren't bothered.
.
I think the ruling is attempting to protect the copyright holder in the following example:
A copyrighted image published on the web is reproduced without the owner's consent and published elsewhere on the web as a second version. The original image was accompanied by the relevant copyright information, but the reproduced copy is not. The court is stating that the lack of copyright information on the illegally reproduced image does not mean that it is no longer copyrighted, which seems like common sense to me.
I think that the problem is that the net is so huge, once a photo gets onto it, there is little chance of control.
Some years ago I found that a picture I had taken was on the brochure for the London boat show.
I had published it on the net and lost control over it.
Equally so, for photo journalists, you need to be sure that it is your photo.
I once took a photo of a boat rally on the Thames and found what I thought was my photo in a boat magazine. It was only when I read that it was credited to someone that I know, that I realised that they were standing alongside me at the time I took the photo and obviously took their own simultaneously.