Copyright issue

[pancake]

A website for well known uk seaside town, is using a couple of my pics (linked from Flickr) they did not ask me if they could do this. I am flattered really, but should they have asked me first? and is any copyright broken?
Its not a big deal to me and I am glad they liked the pics :smile:
Cheers for any thoughts

 

[texascbx]

I would ask them to put on there courtesy of you or I would just download them and remove them, breaking their link.

 

[Amin]

Yes, they have violated your copyright unless you explicitly granted permission to use on your Flickr page. You have every right to tell them to take down the photos or to issue conditions for use (attribution, payment, etc). I personally would ask for attribution, but you can define any terms you like.

 

[pancake]

Cheers guys will contact them and see what they say

 

[Streetshooter]

Cheers guys will contact them and see what they say

Be sure to check your settings on Flickr...AND...
More importantly, you must have a copyright tag in the metadata of all your images.
I have a preset that loads the info to the metadata on import into Light Room.

Please keep us advised of your progress....
Thanks and good luck....Don

 

[Brian S]

With Flickr's new "interface", the default rights appear to be to allow anyone to grab the link to your images and paste it wherever they want. It is a Link back to the FLICKR page. You need to set your permissions to not allow others to grab the link information and post it.

Go to "Your Account", and to "Privacy and Permissions".

Look at: Who can share your photos or video?

and note the "recommended setting" is ANY FLICKR MEMBER.

Change it to "only you".

"On another forum that I moderate", some members were linking to images posted by minors. I tracked the link back, and Flickr-Mailed them to change the settings.

SO: The default for Flickr is for any Flickr member to grab your link and paste it online wherever they want. As long as it is a LINK back and not a downloaded copy, FLICKR thinks it's great. For Flickr...

 

[Hikari]

Be sure to check your settings on Flickr...AND...
More importantly, you must have a copyright tag in the metadata of all your images.
I have a preset that loads the info to the metadata on import into Light Room.

Please keep us advised of your progress....
Thanks and good luck....Don

First, under US copyright law (and many others), a copyright mark is not required. The creator of a piece of art automatically gets copyright unless you are under a work-for-hire contract. A copyright mark gives you no protection beyond what you already have. And if you see an image without a copyright mark, you have no right to take it. Nor does posting something on the web make it "public domain"--a common mistake for those that like to steal images from the WWW. But there are some uses that can be made of an image under "fair use."

Second, copyright law varies from country to country and so I would advise the OP to find out his rights.

Second, Streetshooter is right. Flickr images can come under creative commons and so by posting them there you have lost control over your work. Check to see what rights you have given away--it may be like closing the barn doors after the cows escaped. (Flickr has become a great place to get free art.)

I recommend people start finding out about copyright. One of the most important fights is over the Google Book Settlement and another law suit brought by photographers and illustrators against Google Books over their grab of copyright.

 

[Streetshooter]

Hikari,
Agreed about the symbol but, if an image bears a copyright in the metadata, it shows anyone, that the maker is aware of Copyright issues. If there is no info, it's easy to assume, especially from Flickr and other net sites that the maker is blind to the issues.
ASMP recommends Copyright data for this reason.

It really is just a deterrent to the abusers. I agree with you in whole about the legalities.

 

[Hikari]

Streeshooter, and there is the sad fact of today--people don't give a damn about copyright. I don't understand why people can be so ready to steal creative works. It is never a complement to an artist to have his/her work stolen.

 

[Streetshooter]

Streeshooter, and there is the sad fact of today--people don't give a damn about copyright. I don't understand why people can be so ready to steal creative works. It is never a complement to an artist to have his/her work stolen.

Agreed! These web galleries like Flickr etc, have made it really easy for those uh...uh...people to just help themselves.

 

[PeterB666]

Be sure to check your settings on Flickr...AND...
More importantly, you must have a copyright tag in the metadata of all your images.
I have a preset that loads the info to the metadata on import into Light Room.

Please keep us advised of your progress....
Thanks and good luck....Don

In most countries, copyright is automatic. There is no requirement to include a copyright mark or any other means to identification.

The default on Flickr is for copyright with "All rights reserved".

Linking for commerical purposes* is a clear breach of copyright and a take-down notice should se sent to the ISP that hosts the site if the company does not immediately remove the links.

* Commercial purposes includes making money from or using your images to promote a product or service.

 

[~tc~]

Research how to register the images right away. If the people are real bums, they could easily modify the EXIF and register your work as theirs, and then you would have a helluva fight on your hands.

 

[GaryAyala]

In most countries, copyright is automatic. There is no requirement to include a copyright mark or any other means to identification.

The default on Flickr is for copyright with "All rights reserved".

Linking for commerical purposes* is a clear breach of copyright and a take-down notice should se sent to the ISP that hosts the site if the company does not immediately remove the links.

* Commercial purposes includes making money from or using your images to promote a product or service.

While I am not an attorney, I echo PeterB666. It is my understanding that, in the USA, the physical act of adding a copyright mark to the images comes to play in court for establishing damages (much easier to collect w/ the mark). The copyright mark is not necessary in establishing ownership and owner rights.

Gary

 

[PeterB666]

Research how to register the images right away. If the people are real bums, they could easily modify the EXIF and register your work as theirs, and then you would have a helluva fight on your hands.

There simply is no requirement to "register" images in most countries.

In fact many countries have no mechanism to allow registration (e.g. Australia, Germany, UK, Denmark, Sweeden etc.) while other countries maintain a registration system for "proof" of ownership if litigation is required (US, Canada, Mexico).

 

[john1027]

This link to the Picture Archive Council of America (PACA) provides some good reference material on the subject for US photographers.

PACA: Document Library - Copyright Education: Introduction

 

[~tc~]

Agreed that registration is not a requirement, but it is about the only thing enforceable since I am doubting the OP has even his name in the EXIF.

I was not aware that the UK did not have a means to register images. In the US, its pretty easy - burn the images to a CD and send them to the Library of Congress.