Ryan's MCC images - discussion of use / copyright

Postby mpedersen » Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:04 pm

Hey Ryan, have any comments about this recent news post on another site?

http://glassbox-design.com/2008/rare-fi ... to-the-us/

BTW, I noticed they used one of your images - did they get your permission, or did they lift it?

Matt
mpedersen
Read-Only
 
Posts: 9215
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:53 am

Postby mrblue » Fri Oct 24, 2008 1:42 am

Hey Matt,

I had noticed that news post. I can't really comment much at this stage. As I said above I'm not really sure what's going on at the moment. Things haven't worked out so far with getting them into the U.S but that doesn't mean I have stopped trying.

I can confirm they will be arriving in a short time to a large public aquarium though.

They did not get permission to use my pictures either but it's not the first time this has happened.

Ryan
If your not failing some of the time, your not reaching far enough.
mrblue
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 6:23 am
Location: Australia

Re:

Postby mpedersen » Fri Oct 24, 2008 2:30 am

mrblue wrote:They did not get permission to use my pictures either but it's not the first time this has happened.


Totally off topic, but had they asked, would you have let them? Considering that they didn't ask, how do you feel about it?
mpedersen
Read-Only
 
Posts: 9215
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:53 am

Postby LargeAngels » Fri Oct 24, 2008 3:37 pm

Matt, on that note it is interesting what they have written on that page

"Copyright © 2008 glassbox-design.com. All rights reserved. Do not copy content without permission."
LargeAngels
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 4:25 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Postby Mr Miagi » Fri Oct 24, 2008 5:00 pm

A mate has had a similar situation of late, with a picture of his being used on an online vendors website. I would start watermarking my images mate.
-- Ben
"Save me Jebus"
User avatar
Mr Miagi
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Postby Too Funny » Fri Oct 24, 2008 5:56 pm

"some" useful info here

nice thread
Too Funny
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 2:19 pm
Location: North Korea?

Postby mrblue » Sat Oct 25, 2008 7:59 am

Totally off topic, but had they asked, would you have let them? Considering that they didn't ask, how do you feel about it?


I would have been happy to give permission. I'm not really sure how I feel. It is interesting to see my fish being considered news worthy, even on a fishy webpage but on the other hand it would have been nice to be asked permission. What LargeAngels has pointed out leaves me a bit disgruntled though. The fact they are claiming copyright on my pictures and haven't just linked them from MOFIB or photobucket is a bit rude.

A mate has had a similar situation of late, with a picture of his being used on an online vendors website. I would start watermarking my images mate.


That's a good point Ben, I should start watermarking them. I should have done it before but I don't really like watermarks obscuring my pics and don't wont to seem like I am promoting myself or my business by posting on here. Maybe I should watermark them with MOFIB, as the main reason I post on here is to promote MOFIB?

"some" useful info here

nice thread


Thanks, TooFunny :D .

Ryan.
If your not failing some of the time, your not reaching far enough.
mrblue
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 6:23 am
Location: Australia

Re:

Postby mpedersen » Sun Oct 26, 2008 1:01 am

Sorry to take this thread on a slight tangent ;)

mrblue wrote:
A mate has had a similar situation of late, with a picture of his being used on an online vendors website. I would start watermarking my images mate.


That's a good point Ben, I should start watermarking them. I should have done it before but I don't really like watermarks obscuring my pics and don't wont to seem like I am promoting myself or my business by posting on here. Maybe I should watermark them with MOFIB, as the main reason I post on here is to promote MOFIB?


On the subject of watermarking, what I did with my thousands of online orchid images was to add a 'footer'. Basically, clearly state that it's mine, but not obscure the photo. What did people do? They cropped off the footer ;)

I think I speak for everyone here when I say that MOFIB is 100% commercial friendly. Afterall, I got motivated to start it when I was a) accused of being a commercial seller (which I'm not) and b) wasn't allowed to sell my fish being a hobbyist breeder while at the same time hobbyist (and questionably commercial) coral sellers did not receive the same scruitiny. Which lead to the realization that if we take a very generic view of what defines "commercial", we realize that EVERY fish / invert breeder is going to have to sell progeny at some point. If selling more than one of something makes you commercial, then I think we're all commercial, every last one of us.

So to that end, I say PROMOTE your business as much as you want. If you have a website, put it in your profile info. Don't hesitate to watermark your images "MrBlueAquatics" or whatever you might call your fish breeding operation. We have that entire free marketplace for ANY user to use to promote the fish they sell as well. MOFIB = Commercial Friendly, because we're ALL commercial at some level!


mrblue wrote:It is interesting to see my fish being considered news worthy, even on a fishy webpage but on the other hand it would have been nice to be asked permission. What LargeAngels has pointed out leaves me a bit disgruntled though. The fact they are claiming copyright on my pictures and haven't just linked them from MOFIB or photobucket is a bit rude.


I have a feeling that perhaps they just didn't think about it. I did notice that they did include a link to YOUR profile here, as well as a link to the general forum, saying "Here is a photo posted by Ryan on MOFIB, showing off his captive raised juvenile Mcculloch’s Clowns." So they aren't really claiming copyright over your image parsay, they are citing it as a reference. I don't think they coudl claim "fair use" of the image however (i.e. FAMA is going to be paying royalties / licensing fees for every image they use in the forthcoming MOFIB article).

I gotta say, with my orchid photography, I went after my competition when they used the images. I licensed photos for a book along the way, as well as to many other vendors who PAID to use my images. Anything educational didn't even have to ask, although they generally did. If I found references / aggregations that included my images without asking, there too I demanded the removal of the images largely on principal. In this case, and again solely my opinion, if it gets you more exposure, in the end that would benefit you. So IDK what I'd do. Personally, I'd probably just say "hey, next time, can you please just make sure to ask for someone's permission to use their photos.." If not for you so much as the next guy. I genuinely don't think the poster meant to cause any harm by using the image, and that's certainly part of the thought process in my book!

Funny though, to say all that and to then see that on the end of this article - http://glassbox-design.com/2008/three-f ... ever-seen/ - they write, "Than you to Tetsuo for sharing these photo’s with us, and giving permission to share them with our readers".

BTW, I may split this tangental conversation off into another thread, maybe the photography forum (as it covers copyright / usage rights etc)....Maybe...(and now did it ;) )
mpedersen
Read-Only
 
Posts: 9215
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:53 am

Postby mpedersen » Sun Oct 26, 2008 1:44 am

FYI, I split this topic off into a topic on copyright in the photography forum. I may also pull our standard copyright thread into this forum, or maybe I need a new thread on Photography Licensing, Usage, Copyright etc. All of this is relevant because photographs are property and have value that some users may not even be aware of - all relevant for such a dedicated photography forum. Anyway...
mpedersen
Read-Only
 
Posts: 9215
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:53 am

Postby mrblue » Mon Oct 27, 2008 7:53 am

Sorry it's taken a bit to reply, never is enough hours in the day. I sat down to reply to this and some other e-mails earlier today, got about as far as reading a couple then got distracted by something fishy and didn't make it out of the fishrooms for the last 9hrs.

On the subject of watermarking, what I did with my thousands of online orchid images was to add a 'footer'. Basically, clearly state that it's mine, but not obscure the photo. What did people do? They cropped off the footer Wink


I should probably add a footer at least to my pics but from what you have said it barely seems worth the trouble. It would almost be funny if it wasn't such a serious matter.

I think I speak for everyone here when I say that MOFIB is 100% commercial friendly. Afterall, I got motivated to start it when I was a) accused of being a commercial seller (which I'm not) and b) wasn't allowed to sell my fish being a hobbyist breeder while at the same time hobbyist (and questionably commercial) coral sellers did not receive the same scruitiny. Which lead to the realization that if we take a very generic view of what defines "commercial", we realize that EVERY fish / invert breeder is going to have to sell progeny at some point. If selling more than one of something makes you commercial, then I think we're all commercial, every last one of us.

So to that end, I say PROMOTE your business as much as you want. If you have a website, put it in your profile info. Don't hesitate to watermark your images "MrBlueAquatics" or whatever you might call your fish breeding operation. We have that entire free marketplace for ANY user to use to promote the fish they sell as well. MOFIB = Commercial Friendly, because we're ALL commercial at some level!


I understand MOFIB is commercial friendly and I thank you for suggesting I promote my business on here as much as possible. Some day I might do this a bit more. My previous comment was just to point out I do this to promote the great things MOFIB does more then any commercial exposure I might get. I guess I am lucky that I don't have to do much to promote my business, my little black and white fishies seem to cause more of a stir then I need. FYI and just for interest sakes, my business is called Ryan's Reef, and yes, I know, the names a trumph of originality. :D

I have a feeling that perhaps they just didn't think about it. I did notice that they did include a link to YOUR profile here, as well as a link to the general forum, saying "Here is a photo posted by Ryan on MOFIB, showing off his captive raised juvenile Mcculloch’s Clowns." So they aren't really claiming copyright over your image parsay, they are citing it as a reference. I don't think they coudl claim "fair use" of the image however (i.e. FAMA is going to be paying royalties / licensing fees for every image they use in the forthcoming MOFIB article).


It's interesting you say this Matt. I was contacted by Eric from glassbox who was very apologetic about the whole thing and explained that they were not claiming copyright and the linking they did to MOFIB and my profile was a way of crediting me and MOFIB. He had just had a hard time joining MOFIB and without a membership had a hard time contacting me. I have given him permission to use my images so in this case everything worked out.

In this case it wasn't a great drama but I do understand the importance of discussing this topic. You never know who the 'next guy' might be. I don't think some people realize the amount of work most of us have to put in before we are able to take many of our pictures. It also possible that the general misuse of our pictures might result in breeders being more reluctant to share such images, which at the end of the day would leave all of us and the hobby poorer for it.

Better get back to it, it seems time (and fish) don't wait for this man. :D

Ryan.
If your not failing some of the time, your not reaching far enough.
mrblue
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 6:23 am
Location: Australia

Re:

Postby mpedersen » Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:09 am

mrblue wrote:It's interesting you say this Matt. I was contacted by Eric from glassbox who was very apologetic about the whole thing and explained that they were not claiming copyright and the linking they did to MOFIB and my profile was a way of crediting me and MOFIB. He had just had a hard time joining MOFIB and without a membership had a hard time contacting me. I have given him permission to use my images so in this case everything worked out.


Eric mentioned the registration issues to me as well...I'm hoping he can provide me with a few more details so I can maybe get things fixed. Folks, MOFIB is not "Anti-MAC", just for the record ;)

I'm very glad to hear that things are all straightened out :) I hadn't meant to make a public example out of Eric & his site...it just kinda happened! Again, glad we're all on the same page now!

---

On the general topic of copyright, unless someone is claiming "fair use", Credit is nice, but permission is required. And for the record, even if you're protected under copyright law or fair use, it's my opinion that generally photographers want to be asked for their permission anyway...i.e. which is why I have a folder full of emails OK'ing the images I use in the MOFIB fish breeding presentation.

I'm guilty of being a stickler over copyright...I've had too many of my images stolen and used in for-profit situations. Those parties who infringe on my own works probably don't stop to think about the thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours I invested in creating those images, let alone that I mention in my galleries that I do license images for use...(have had a few in books and magazines in the past).

Probably worth posting up a link to MOFIB's copyright thread - http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=978

It also possible that the general misuse of our pictures might result in breeders being more reluctant to share such images, which at the end of the day would leave all of us and the hobby poorer for it.


Yeah, that is a concern I too have...I wouldn't want to see users stop posting images on MOFIB for fear that they'd be lifted and used somewhere else.
mpedersen
Read-Only
 
Posts: 9215
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:53 am

Postby "Umm, fish?" » Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:42 am

I should probably add a footer at least to my pics but from what you have said it barely seems worth the trouble. It would almost be funny if it wasn't such a serious matter.


Ah, but from what I've read the courts look at altering a photo to remove a copyright statement as de facto proof that the person altering the photo knew that they were breaking copyright and come down very hard on such people. So, it sounds pretty darn worthwhile to do. That actually sounds like a good way to handle the situation, Matt.

Congratulations on getting things worked out in a happy manner. I've not had many such disputes resolved in such a good way, unfortunately.

This is what I have up as a sticky in the photography forum on my local club's website, if it helps at all:

Just so everyone knows, the rules with photos are: Ask nicely first, wait for a reply from the photographer, then print out and hang (or turn into a desktop background or whatever). I've never, ever had anyone turn me down if I ask nicely to use their photos. But it is the photographer's right to do so if they wish. And a lot of people get really peeved if you don't ask first.

The copyright law is really confusing. The law states that the photographer owns the copyright to their photos and has the right to control how their photos are used. Just because they post them here doesn't give anyone the right to print them and use them for other purposes unless the photographer says it's okay.

I don't want to get into a situation where photographers decide to stop posting their photos here because this turns into a place where people don't respect the artist and their work. So remember, ask first and respect the photographer's decision, whatever it may be.
Andy

“Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.” --Mark Twain
User avatar
"Umm, fish?"
Read-Only
 
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: Boulder, CO

Postby fishguttz » Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:40 pm

Looks like they are stealing MOFIB bandwith. go to page and view html source. example below. or did you give them permission.

Code: Select all
<span></em></p>
<p>Here is a photo posted by <a href="http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&amp;u=155" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">Ryan</span></strong></a> on a href="http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/" ]arget="_blank"><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">MOFIB,</span></strong></a> showing off his captive raised juvenile Mcculloch’s Clowns. I’d
fishguttz
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:00 am
Location: New York

Re:

Postby mpedersen » Tue Oct 28, 2008 3:01 pm

fishguttz wrote:Looks like they are stealing MOFIB bandwith. go to page and view html source. example below. or did you give them permission.


Fishguttz, touched up your post just a bit to make it easier to follow.

The example you cite is in no way stealing MOFIB bandwith. They are simply linking to pages on MOFIB. That by its very nature is what makes the internet work in the first place!!! Even better, they are not only citing a the source, but providing a direct pointer to it!

There are some websites that request that people do not link to them, but the reality is that unless a link circumvents some security restrictions, there is nothing illegal with linking to another publicly available web page.

I strongly suggest another browse of the copyright thread here - http://www.marinebreeder.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=978 - there are some examples on "bandwidth theft" and other issues that come up.

FWIW,

Matt
mpedersen
Read-Only
 
Posts: 9215
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:53 am


Return to Microscopy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests