question Tanks, Tiger 1- copywrited?

[Jack]

Whilst down at Bovy last month they had brought the Tiger 1 out. Folks had of course travelled miles to see it.

 

One guy asked one of the 'friends' if he could take his camera and take a picture of the inside. He was just about to click the button when one of the staff told him that no pictures of the inside was allowed as the inside was copywrited............

 

What is that about - anyone come across that before??

[Marmite!!]

There is a sign up in the Tank Museum stating that any photos taken inside remain the copyright of the tank museum...

[Tony B]

Yes, in the Cold war Gallery at Firepower. There are a number of advertising type posters, which are copyright. It also stops commercial sale of such pictures to magazines etc. I always ask before taking photos in any museum, some artifacts don't like light anyway. Quite often if I say I'd like to post them on HMVF and do a write up, the co-operation is very forthcoming. :cool2: they normally arent very keen on tripods either, so I carry a monopod walking staff.

[Snapper]

Museums are private property. You cannot snap without permission and no commercial sales are allowed. As HMVF is a free to view site, then we get round it by publicizing the museum. I don't know how the Tiger is copyrighted, I'd presume the copyright of the interior belongs to Henschel or whoever built the blimmin' thing. But it is now over 50 years old. So, the copyright issue relates to being on the premisis.

 

MB

[Tony B]

I did hear one mobile phone company banned the staff from bringing phones on to their site, because of the cameras in them. :rofl:As an aside if doing any TV or film work, worth getting it in writing if you want to take pictures on set. A friend got into some grief over this some years ago.

Edited July 30, 2008 by Tony B

[AlienFTM]

The inside of the Tiger is authentic apart from a handful of modifications to satisfy Health and Safety.

[Snapper]

What, no gun, nothing noisey, nothing pointy and nothing metal?

 

MB

[Tony B]

And an emergency exit cut in the back, openable from the outside.:sweat:

[Scammell4199]

Right at the end of the Sunday at TankFest, for those of us tank geeks who had hung around long enough, they allowed us to climb up a set of steps and take a look inside the turret through the hatch in the side. It did look heighly detailed and immaculate.

[ArtistsRifles]

I did hear one mobile phone company banned the staff from bringing phones on to their site, because of the cameras in them. :rofl:As an aside if doing any TV or film work, worth getting it in writing if you want to take pictures on set. A friend got into some grief over this some years ago.

 

A certain automotive manufacturer issued a memo a few years ago banning employees from bringing mobile phones fitted with cameras on to their premises. In exchange they agreed to provide those engineers who needed them leased mobiles. When these arrived they were all fitted with camera's - but these were OK as the company had provided them.. Try figuring that one out!!! :confused: :confused:

[Tony B]

A certain automotive manufacturer issued a memo a few years ago banning employees from bringing mobile phones fitted with cameras on to their premises. In exchange they agreed to provide those engineers who needed them leased mobiles. When these arrived they were all fitted with camera's - but these were OK as the company had provided them.. Try figuring that one out!!! :confused: :confused:

Errrr, lifes to short mate! :shake:

[chevpol]

I wanted to put the photos I took at bovvy on my fotopic site, when I asked, they said no. :-(

 

If I published them with the copyright sign on them, does that stop people from downloading them?

 

Mark

[Snapper]

Nothing stops anyone downloading...it's how newspapers work. I'd just let it go for the time being....museums don't have time to monitor every site and person breathing God's air, but they aren't stupid. Other sites have posted snaps of the Tiger, I haven't heard of any who've been made to remove images.

[chevpol]

ok, will wait till later on on the year, still a cracking museum though!!! Am thinking of joining the friends, can anybody recommend it?

 

Mark

[Adrian Barrell]

ok, will wait till later on on the year, still a cracking museum though!!! Am thinking of joining the friends, can anybody recommend it?

 

Mark

 

Highly! For one thing, you're supporting the museum as the Friends do help in many ways. To get the most out of it, you need to get down there reasonably regularly and be willing to help where needed.

John Pearson is a Friend of long standing and he can give you a better idea of what he gets up to...

[Shakey985]

Here are some from a Leopard

The first one is of the driver trainer/instant panal reaction testing station.

The next two are from the crew commanders hatch, a visitor to our museum can take these photos with no problems.

In fact they can take photos of the gunnery trainers with no problems. I would if I was going to make a $ out of my photos make a donation to the museum.

[AndyFowler]

How to encourage people to have an interest in history NOT ! :nono:

[Snapper]

I have some sympathy in that restorations and running costs are a huge drain and these days everything is profit related. I don't understand some aspects of it - but I suppose the intention is to stop people making commercial gain out of photographing someone else's work. It's the same if you visit an English Heritage or National Trust property. I've taken photos at some, but usually only the grounds and external views can be used freely. It depends how litigious or plain mean the "owner" is.

 

I've been told that all the snaps I've taken at Beltring (as an example) for the show and CMV do not belong to me. I would contest this, because I've signed no agreements and retain my copyright pursuent to the 1988 Act. To be frank, I don't have any positive feelings towards anyone quibbling over money for snaps of old tanks. This is a generalisation, but it's my view. I always give my snaps to any "punter"/friend/group who would like them for personal or publicity use - but always expect to profit from anything commercial. It probably explains why some people make more money than I do, so don't tell the wife.

 

I might get some Beltring pix posted one of these weeks - there is a hell of a lot of it.

 

MB

[AlienFTM]

I've been told that all the snaps I've taken at Beltring (as an example) for the show and CMV do not belong to me. I would contest this, because I've signed no agreements and retain my copyright pursuent to the 1988 Act.

 

Have you ever read the small print on a ticket for a gig (I am particularly thinking Pink Floyd here)? it says something like:

 

You are expressly forbidden from taking photographs. Any photographs you take become the proboperty of (the company).

 

By purchasing this ticket you revoke any rights to your own image and (the company) reserves the right to use your image which has been recorded in any film taken at the event, in any film footage (the company) itself makes of the event.

 

Of course Pink Floyd are not themselves without sin. They frequently used soundbites lifted from the radio for example. They were taken to court by one hick local radio presenter who insisted that the sound of his voice in a two-second clip on Wish You Were Here absolutely made the whole album and sued for his equal share of the royalties. It was thrown out.

[Adrian Barrell]

It's an interesting issue. In my case, a well known model manufacturer has used my photographs of my tank in the instructions for their multibank engine kit and on their website to advertise it. The pictures were lifted from the internet without my knowledge or permission.

 

In reality, I'm not that bothered though I feel it was cheeky to say the least! Perhaps I should ask for a built up engine model as recompense!

[Tony B]

Is a right minefeild. I take pictures of many groups and am happy for the group to use them, I've normal got in on one of thier tickets anyway. But use by other's it is at least polite to ask. So who gets copyright of any private photos posted here? I'm quite happy to post for information and amusment of other Forum members, but with the collection being built up on the site, can't be long before there raided. Maybe we should have a way of inserting a site copyright? There is a classic photo of my 101 Ambulance I see in a lot of magazines, never seen a penny for it.

So if we take vehicles to a show, and the Great Unwashed, plus proffesionals like Snapper, and the gifted ametuer like young Harry, start happy snapping does the owner have any control of the image? (P.S. Snapper and Harry, the more the merrier as far you are concerned :-D)