gritineye Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 (edited) Please don't misunderstand the reason for this post, I am just seeking clarity not complaining. Copyright All material on this Web site, including text, graphics and photographs is copyright of the Historic Military Vehicle Forum unless otherwise stated and protected by UK and international copyright laws. How does this rule work in view of what is said below in the Landrover gallery thread? Mark - I am uneasy with posting of what I am sure has copywrite issues attached to it. You may want to drop Bob an email and ask him for his permission as he is in fact a member of HMVF. Many thanks for your understanding. Jack. I have only just noticed what the rules state, I thought copyright remained with the person who took or owned the photos or wrote the text. As we are posting on a public forum there is little chance of us preventing our photos from being copied and that is fine with most I would think, however should some one decide to publish one of our photos say in a magazine without payment, which we objected to, who would be the recipient of any money if it was paid? Does this mean that we should protect our photos with a watermark or copyright symbol before posting just in case? Edited February 11, 2009 by Marmite!! Added quote tags Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmite!! Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 By agreeing to the rules you assign copyright to any material that belongs to you to HMVF so that it comes under the forum protection, it's up to the managment to decide when a breech has taken place & action required, we allow sharing of information as stated in the rules, this is why we say that any material posted must be your own or have permission to post on HMVF if a member has any material he does not want copied elsewhere then best not to post it on the internet period.. By all means please do watermark your photos.. same as when you upload photos to eBay they become their property. How does this rule work in view of what is said below in the Landrover gallery thread? If permission is not obtained then the images will have to be removed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmite!! Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Also note in the rules is says "unless otherwise stated" if your work is clearly marked with your Copyright ie.. Clive Elliott's work then the copyright remains with the owner & it would be up to the owner of said work to sort out any copyright issues if they arise elsewhere.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gritineye Posted February 11, 2009 Author Share Posted February 11, 2009 :tup:: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snapper Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 In terms of your own wholly owned material: I've never been in the habit of watermarking my material published on HMVF because I trust it 100% (my choice). I always take it as being a rule in spirit, rather than a strict terms of a binding contract; otherwise I would never have published a single frame on the site. To be frank, I have never felt I was in danger of having Jack steal my material for profit and base everything I place on here on trust. I cannot vouch for visitors and take my chances. Hence why they are always very low resolution files. The UK's 1988 Copyright Act is quite explicit and even with a general agreement such as the one we have here when we join there isn't a copyright lawyer worth his Porsche who would not run rings around it for the cost of a consultation and a laté. At News International ALL copyright is with anyone who takes images who is not on a staff contract even though this gives the papers therein broad approval to use them how they wish. Syndication - that is third party selling - has to be done on the basis of a signed agreement with a percentage split, usually 60-40 in favour of the photographer. I was recently invited to enter into a contract whereby a publisher virtually assumed ownership of my work to do with what they wanted while only paying me the original fee for appearance in their particular title. I declined. We had and continue to have a well used 'one time use only' agreement which is fairly standard in the business. Other people's stuff What we do here on HMVF is protect the site from litigation when people post up images to which they have no ownership. It is widely accepted that much material copied from the internet is 'in the public domain' already and is not going to cause much of a problem. But there will be exceptions. Always keep in mind the acknowledgements to copyright you see in books. This is why reprinting from books is dangerous. A publisher will have sought permission to use images in advance. There are terms and conditions in every instance. It's always best to stick to your own stuff or if you borrow snaps, make sure you can prove permission to use. Responsibility rests entirely with the person posting the images. The test will be when we get our first complaint. I hope this clarifies. I have some knowledge of this area due to working for 34 years in newspaper picture libraries and attached editorial roles. If in doubt ask the Mod team. It is not in our interest to be stung by stuff which isn't ours and certainly not to make use of yours without a proper and amicable understanding. It's only good manners. MB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gritineye Posted February 11, 2009 Author Share Posted February 11, 2009 Thanks for that nice to know how it should all work Mark. I also would never think one of the management would nick members stuff, I hope no one thought I did, as you say it's a trust thing. I had already thought of the low res thing which makes it pretty unlikely anyone would print any photos lifted off the site anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Barrell Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Pictures of mine that Hanno hosted have been lifted for commercial use in a model kit. My permission was not sought, though I would have given it! I look forward to meeting the chap concerned and hearing his explanation.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Are you going for him then Adrian ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Barrell Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 No, lifes too short to worry about that sort of thing. In my case, there was no financial loss, it would be different if I was depending on them for my livelyhood. I might suggest he compansates me with one of the kits! It was cheeky though because my name is clearly on the site though upon checking just now the copyright is listed as belonging to Hanno. I suppose the site is though the photos are mine. He may have asked Hanno but I'm sure Hanno would have checked with me. Unless he did and I have forgotten....... Like I said, lifes too short! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gritineye Posted February 11, 2009 Author Share Posted February 11, 2009 I might suggest he compensates me with one of the kits! I got a free white metal Explorer kit in much the same way a few years ago, I didn't suggest it and wasn't complaining either, just commenting on the picture of my Explorer on the web advert, it wasn't even my photo but he assumed it was! :-D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snapper Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I think if someone is making money off your work, and remember your snaps are your property, without your permission then you have a right to complain. But, as Adrian says, is it worth the effort? In his case I agree, whereas in mine, I would be aggressive about protecting my copyright. It's a question of being asked. As said, things freely available on the web tend to slip into the public domain, but this is no defence in copyright law if pushed. Theft is theft. It is down to the owner to push as far as they want. Adrian has achieved the right balance in his case. However, if a progressive set of snaps of a rebuild were lifted for a book and presented in a way which gave the impression they had been done for it, then I would pounce. No harm in getting some ££ when it is due. This is not the case if it is a snap of your motor taken by someone else, but how nice that the model maker sent Bernard an example. That is really good PR and proper manners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Barrell Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 That's exactly as I see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I suppose the other thing to consider is if you have the money to pursue these people through the courts, i imagine it is not cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snapper Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 nope!:shake: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcspool Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 (edited) It was cheeky though because my name is clearly on the site though upon checking just now the copyright is listed as belonging to Hanno. I suppose the site is though the photos are mine. He may have asked Hanno but I'm sure Hanno would have checked with me. Unless he did and I have forgotten....... Like I said, lifes too short! Adrian, I was never approached by anyone regarding the use of your pictures on any of the pages at http://www.geocities.com/sherman_sn5271/ The footer of each page clearly states copyright is reserved, so anyone using any images or text doesn't care about the work others do to inform readers. Not nice, especially if done for commercial gain. From my many sites photos and complete texts have been lifted and copied elsewhere, both online, electronic media and in print. Sadly these people, some of them reputable authors and publishers, never contacted me to ask for permission. I would gladly give permission to other people who do not gain commercially - my goal being exchange of information - but I think it is normal to be compensated when material is being lifted from a website and published commercially. If and when I confronted the perpetrators, the answer - if any - was a mere "sorry. . . ". But like Adrian said, life's too short! Regards, Hanno Edited February 17, 2009 by mcspool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.