Copyright infringement?

[Satanta]

On a non-photo board I post images quite a bit. I've been part of the board since 1998 and in '01 after I had a stroke, they provided me with a new Dell and put me in as an Admin. It was a rough start but now I'm known to be strn but fair.

Yesterday I posted the same image here in the Landscape forum as I posted on the board. Granted-it was a bit dark but understand, when I got in I was cold and tired, my foot hurt [[two big open holes with tendons showing since Sept after surgery]] So I did a quick, sloppy edit, posted and took a nap.

Now I can handle critique but one of the members there took it upon himself not only to critique it but to constantly harangue me over the image. He re-edited the image to lighten it then took it upon himself to convert to B&W and add some elements to it.

I didn't give him a hard time-was quite nice about it actually so today he actually reposts the image elsewhere and places a poll on our board asking whether people like it or not.

Again-I don't mind critique but I am a *little* pissed about the whole thing keeping on and with the editing and reposting IU'm wondering about infringement and whether I should just toss him for the infringement or whther I might do it for the hell of it anyway.

[Mr. Pickles]

I would first, toss him from the board for awhile, if not forever. But it also depends on if you have a policy about redoing others work. If he posted it on a different board, then ban him and talk to the admins of the other board. If he re-posted it on your board, then delete the poll...?

Secondly, I'm not sure if it is a copyright infringement or not. It is probably, but you'd never win a case. Well, you probably would win, but wouldn't get anything from it.

Don't feel like the first one. Happens all the time. We have an option in each members Control Panel that places an "Editing OK" message in the member info panel at the left of each post. By default it is set "off". You can set it to editing OK or Ask First. It doesn't stop it, but does help the Moderators if something like this ever comes up. Also should let anybody that wants to "edit" know how the poster would like it handled.

[heartseye]

Sad for you that somebody would act like such an ass.....I would just bring it to the Moderator's attention and just let go of it. Regards, Bob

[Satanta]

I am an Admin on the other board. We have rules aagainst posting illegal or pornography. Because we are a news board we get info from all over- I'm not concerned about taking him to court or anything like that but he has some of the staff and members worked up pretty good. I took it in stride until his poll.

If I/We ban he him wull not come back-that is a policy. We've tried returning members to the board and it never works out.

His poll and the original thread have been placed in the Admin section for holding until we get it sorted out.

[Mr. Pickles]

Then I would leave it in the admin board. If anybody asks, via a PM or a public question, I'd answer it via PM and explain what was done and why.

[Gbee]

He has taken it a wee bit too far. I'd tell him to take down the new post, or you take it down and tell him to continue in the post already running.

[270weatherby]

I had a similar situation happen to me, I posted an image and someone decided to edit the photo. Re-editing the photo didn't bother me, but this guy put his own own copyright on my photo. I got kind of livid over it. Long story short, since then I don't post anything I plan to use for anything on forum boards anymore. That's just my way of protecting myself and my work.

[CI Photography]

Don't you just hate people like this, to show up on your board. The editing would not bother me in the least, but what he did after that, I (MAYBE) would give him a (PUBLIC) warning, and after that he would be gone.



Joe

[photosbyrowell]

I guess just asking him to not post your image elsewhere wont work? But people will act childish and not care about anybody else. Those are your images and you should protect them.

[Capn_Jack]

Good advice all around--From a board moderating experience, I'd pass the entire subject off to another trusted Moderator and have nothing to do with it yourself. There's a conflict of interest here as you were the wronged party.

Please don't take this as a critique on your character, that is most certainly not my intent; I'm fully sure that you'd be able to handle this in a non-biased way. But, I've seen boards where Mods are offended and take action to rectify the offense and, even if it was completely fair and within SOP for the board, it's seen as an abuse of power by some members. It's like a judge presiding over his own lawsuit; it just ain't kosher. It's far easier to pass it over to a neutral Mod and let them handle it within the realm of the board policies. That provides all kinds of fallback for the other mods to avoid a "look what he did!" situation, and sets a healthy precedent in the future.

Besides, it doesn't stop you from keeping a closer eye on the culprit in the future (if he's still around after the other Mod's decision) and acting accordingly.

The gall of someone to do that, though--It's upsetting that's for sure. I hope you get it sorted.

Cheers
Craig

[generic]

And then something like this can happen!
I had posted an image earlier. At one point I and another photographer were at the same location and I pointed out to this person the pov location and what kind of image was available from that place. The photog took a shot(s) from there and eventually did post, and sell an image that appeared identical. It did not surprise me at all and seemed like a good thing. I was right after all, it was a nice shot. Then someone mentioned that it appeared similar and imediately a cloud formed. I made a point of posting an explanation but there was still the chance of confusion.

Bottem line is that I'll be really careful (especially on line) and try to be clear about these kinds of things and if in doubt I just drop it and not give a rumor leggs. Unless I'm really sure I'll just say nothing.

My stuff is commonly amatuerish and not earth shattering but like you I'd be bothered by blatent misuse still. I dont know for sure how (when) I'd react. At the least I guess I'd simply start marking the file ambiguously in a way that could prove ownership.

gene

[Capn_Jack]

Is there a way to mark a photo without taking away from the quality of it--I know of watermarks stamped in the middle, but that to me detracts from the photo if you want to show it off. And, putting a name in the bottom corner is an easy crop away from being gone. So is there some sort of digital signature you can put on a file?

Cheers
Craig

[kevgermany]

Originally Posted by Capn_Jack

Is there a way to mark a photo without taking away from the quality of it--I know of watermarks stamped in the middle, but that to me detracts from the photo if you want to show it off. And, putting a name in the bottom corner is an easy crop away from being gone. So is there some sort of digital signature you can put on a file?

Cheers
Craig

Yes and they're undetectable without the right reader. So they don't interfere, but will give the game away if you suspect something fishy. Real answer is to post small jpeg examples that're no use outside of the web.

There's some info on wikipedia, here's a commercial link Digital Watermarking | Watermark Technology | Digimarc (I have no interest here).

[Martyn_HK]

Hi,

new to these forums but a member on several others where this hind of thing has happened.

Have you tried contacting the offender and asking him not to do it and to remove the images he has posted. An initial polite request might be all that's needed.

Martyn

[Satanta]

Here's the update-

I stayed out of it because I didn't want to appear biased. I never even took it into the staff area to get the others in on it.

The poster had come on my original post three times and demeaned the image-to which each time I replied nicely and told him I agreed with his points and explained that I was cold, tired and my foot was hurting like hell [[Stepped on a tropical catfish in Sept. Being an organ transplant victim my immune system couldn't deal so I ended up having surgery/two weeks in the hospital and still have a large hole with a tendon showinf-got pics if anyone is interested. ]] and that I would clean the image up.

He then took the image and posted a poll on it.

I was napping at the time.

A staffer yanked the poll and gave him points. [[too many points can result in being 'jailed' or removed from membership]]

He got back on my original thread and made more condescending remarks-obviously trying to goad me as I am the "Banhammer Wielder" on the board. Like the old West, some kid always has to test his mettle.

A second staffer jailed him and he got into a pissing match with a third threatening to meet him and knock his teeth out.

A fourth staffer changed his password-technically banning him without doing the paperwork.

I cleaned and reposted the image-got feedback and made improvements and everyone is happy.

I appreciate my staff but trust me-if it was done to another staffer said poster would have been gone MUCH sooner with a note:

[Gbee]

WOW! He turned out to be one of those .... sorry about that,been the victim of such behaviour in the past on The Internet's REAL Wild West; DPreview.

Originally Posted by Satanta

Here's the update-:

[Fusion]

We have all experienced idiots from time to time, 'ban the beggar', he deserved it.

[jyanich]

Originally Posted by kevgermany

Yes and they're undetectable without the right reader. So they don't interfere, but will give the game away if you suspect something fishy. Real answer is to post small jpeg examples that're no use outside of the web.

There's some info on wikipedia, here's a commercial link Digital Watermarking | Watermark Technology | Digimarc (I have no interest here).

I am currently using Digimarc (only the free eval version), and I like it alot. I don't believe people can even see that the photo is watermarked unless they have the digital watermark plug in installed. The only down side is that if the image is downloaded and edited (either size changed or resolution) the watermark can be weakened and lost. Also, if the watermark is placed on very strongly...it causes a grainy appearance...almost similar to an over sharpening artifact.

[Mark McCall]

About the legal end of this....

I share moderation duties with a photograhic legal expert on another forum.

This has come up before. Here's her spin:
It is legal to post an image you did not take to any online discussion or in print if it's for editorial purposes, and does not damage the integrity, reputation, or financial status of the creator.

BUT....I do agree that permission should have been obtained.

[W.Smith]

I don't like to deface my own images with a watermark. A steganographic copyright notice is a better solution, imo.

Steganography - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Windows steganography apps.