This Is The Mindset Of A Lot Of People

Oh to educate everyone at once

I lose friends over stuff like that. lost a friend when I posted the photographers name under her photos form her Caribbean whale watching trip. She wanted people to think she took them and asked for people to share them. So now we don't talk. She is an artist who sells her art and says it was public domain because she got it from Google. Yeah Google.

The Flickr version

Brad,

I've heard of Google! Must be one hell of a photographer!

Rich

This is why I use watermarks. I had an image used on Facebook by a local radio station. It was an unwatermarked image from another online gallery I had (now closed). When I commented that the image was used without permission the station manager apologized and said it was posted by a college intern who found it on my other gallery. All of the unauthorized uses of my photos that I know of have been situations like that. If that particular gallery had watermarks the intern would have probably looked elsewhere.

Schools seem to teach all kinds of footnotes and credits for written words but not for images. The educators need to be educated on this issue.

Makes the U.S. look like Uttar Pradesh.. great capture.

what's FB's usual response to take down notices?

Educators need to take a stance on this. There were teachers assigning my child in school to copy and paste images from google. I was shocked.

Lisa.I always thought "class room educational use" was void of copyright.... It's when the teachers are telling the kids to copy and sell images from google that ownership matters!

are there people riding on the roof of that oncoming train?

"Schools seem to teach all kinds of footnotes and credits for written words but not for images. The educators need to be educated on this issue."

They are more than educated on the issue. I doubt there is a teacher alive who isn't familiar with The Classroom Guidelines, which were published as part of the House of Representatives Report on the (then) pending 1976 Copyright Act.

Publishers love to sue schools, so administrators are adamant that teachers sign off and abide by the Guidelines. Oddly enough, the guidelines are not part of the copyright legislation nor are they legally binding. However, since they were officially published by the House, they have become the court room standard in cases involving schools.

SINGLE COPYING FOR TEACHERS:

A single copy of the following items may be made for a teacher's scholarly research or use in teaching or preparation to teach a class:
-- A chapter from a book.
-- An article from a periodical or newspaper.
-- A short story, short essay or short poem, whether or not from a collective work.
-- A chart, graph, diagram, drawing, cartoon or picture from a book, periodical or newspaper.

MULTIPLE COPIES FOR CLASSROOM USE:

Multiple copies (not to exceed more than one copy per pupil in a course) may be made by or for a teacher giving a course for classroom use or discussion, provided that:

--The copying meets the tests of brevity and spontaneity as defined below; and
-- Meets the cumulative effect test as defined below, and
-- Each copy includes a notice of copyright.

http://www.copyright.com/Services/copyrightoncampus/content/index_class.html

Publishers are coming down so hard on schools that lawful fair use is being squeezed into an ever-smaller window. Their intent is to outlaw fair use entirely. It's only natural that there is a growing backlash among professors and school administrators.


Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

...excellent clarification there Dan... yeah fair use..that's what I meant.. personally, I think fair use being squeezed will ultimately result in kids being (even)less well educated.. suits them doing the squeezing tho!

issue at hand.... can facebook be issued take down notices or have they denounced all responsibility in some bs disclaimer?

"issue at hand.... can facebook be issued take down notices or have they denounced all responsibility in some bs disclaimer?"

FB complies with DMCA takedown notices. However, I can't for the life of me understand how the OP would be upset enough to send one. If that happens, I hope the affected poster immediately files a counter-claim, thus restoring the image. He has a very strong case for fair use. At that point, if the OP still wishes to pursue a takedown, the matter would need to be settled legally.


Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

I just finished a digital design degree a year ago and before each class starts the teacher goes over the syllabus with the entire class. Outlined in bold letters are copyrite laws, infringement, and so on. Then it lists the fines you will receive, expelled from the school, court, and a lot more.
Not sure what schools Dan is talking about, but not all of them are mindless, or care free about this.

"Fair Use" - I'm surprised that the 'schools', professors, et al, don't make the image maker pay them to use their work - you want your work used as an example in my class - you pay me for using you - otherwise - I'll stick to those that are already in the public domain.

"fair use" - how about just some plain morality about stealing other folks work?

I've recently started watermarking all my images. I hear more and more of these horror stories lately.

Much along the same lines concerning teaching morality / ethics in the school system, each year at the school I worked at every student and teacher/staff member had to sign a form concerned with Plagiarism and the use of others works. It's unfortunate that it's being taught in some places, however disregarded when arriving at places of "higher education", such as some colleges/universities.

do you remember when the interstate speed limit was 55 mph? It was the law BUT.......... keep your rez low if you don't want it to have some sort of protection.

I love this...
"How can it be stolen if it was already online?"

That is really really funny. But it's true (altho sad). We can't stop anyone from stealing and using our images if we post our images online.

A pal of mine uses my images to dress up his computer screen. Has he ever bought 1 small image of mine ever? No.

I don't mind of someone lifts a picture of mine for their computer wallpaper. I figure they'll probably tire of it after awhile and get something else. I just don't like it when somebody posts one of my photos online without credit. A local restaurant guide stole a photo I shot from my local dining guide illustrate their own without giving me credit. I tried to contact them but I was ignored.

Watermark wouldn't have mattered; they left the black bar as it was with my © And it was already a low rez version 1024 pixels wide. More than "How can it be stolen comment?" as well as the fact that it took the guy more than a day to finally take the meme down.