Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

A Blogger's Cautionary Tale.


Paintman e2
8 902 173 United Kingdom
22 Jul 2012 9:49PM
This Blog may be of interest to some of you. It's about the legal issues of using photos from the web and Copyright.


http://www.roniloren.com/blog/2012/7/20/bloggers-beware-you-can-get-sued-for-using-pics-on-your-blog.html

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

23 Jul 2012 12:51AM
So the blogger used a photo from elsewhere, in spite of the site in question clearly stating that the copyright belonged with the original poster? And seems surprised about the resulting case?
keithh e2
11 23.4k 33 Wallis And Futuna
23 Jul 2012 12:21PM

Quote:Or was I the only one blissfully unaware that using pics on blogs wasn't protected?


and yet the blogger admitted that he asked for sections of his work to be removed from other sites.
thewilliam 6 4.8k
23 Jul 2012 6:50PM
A blog is "published" and open for all to see. This makes it no different from a newspaper or magazine.

Too many professionals in the field, especially newspaper publishers, seem to believe that copyright protection applies only to their work and that they can use other people's pictures whenever they like.

It's like somebody stealing from a market and, when they're caught, they protest, "this stuff was on a table set up in a public street. How was I to know that it was somebody's property?"
User_Removed 5 4.6k 1 Scotland
24 Jul 2012 10:35AM
I think there is a fundamental (well, maybe not fundamental - but important) difference between Wee Lizzy in Cardiff copying pictures from the internet to brighten up her schoolgirl blog and some commercial operator like a newspaper publisher or professional photographer copying images for business purposes.

I see Wee Lizzy's situation as being analogous to the old-fashioned equivalent of cutting pictures from magazines to stick in a scrapbook.
24 Jul 2012 11:24AM

Quote:I see Wee Lizzy's situation as being analogous to the old-fashioned equivalent of cutting pictures from magazines to stick in a scrapbook.

To an extent that is true and it's a good analogy however, if you cut something out of a magazine, you at least have an obvious indication that it is someone else's work. Posting on a blog without attribution gives an implication that the photo belongs to you.

Policing is another issue, whilst Wee Lizzy is probably doing no harm, how do you differentiate between harmless fun and those potentially making a money from their blogs either directly (sponsored links etc) or by promoting their business. It's a nightmare to start having different 'rules' for different people.

Once Joe Public thinks it is accepted practice to 'lift' photos and use them freely at will, it's only a short step to it being done commercially as it becomes ingrained as 'acceptable practice' - it is already happening with many newspapers lifting from websites and even using downloaded comps from an agency, and cropping or editing out watermarking!

I'm not sure what the answer is but the industry and those who take photographs whether professionally or not do need to make a noise about this. The more people who are aware of the law relating to copyright rather than just base their opinions on hearsay and conjecture, the better
User_Removed 10 3.3k 4 United Kingdom
24 Jul 2012 11:31AM
I remember a children's hospital having to paint over their murals of Mickey Mouse and co. Disney are very proactive in protecting their copyrights. They don't mind the children's hospital doing that really but their lawyers do, if you don't protect the designs they go into the public domain and end up on more Chinese lunch boxes than they do (illegally) already.

I think the only answer is zero tolerance. If you like my work you'll be happy to pay to use it. If you don't want to use it then you're free to use your own stuff.
keithh e2
11 23.4k 33 Wallis And Futuna
24 Jul 2012 12:36PM
Who the ....is Wee Lizzy?

Quote:Who the ....is Wee Lizzy?
Jimmy Crankie's incontinent sister Smile
CTee 8 89 United Kingdom
24 Jul 2012 1:47PM
Ref: Wee Lizzy, this is where schools should be setting the foundations of what is right or wrong. Part of any ICT lessons should be preparing the future generations on how to use emerging technology. Too many students copy reams of stuff from the net, would they understand plagiarism if it can from a book? Not that there is any difference!!
Nick_w e2
7 4.1k 99 England
24 Jul 2012 3:07PM

Quote:Ref: Wee Lizzy, this is where schools should be setting the foundations of what is right or wrong.

They do, and are on constant look out for plagiarism. But is plagiarism anything new? Didn't we copy our mates book on the back of the bus? (had one mate even copy my name on top of his homework ... Pr@) granted its easier to do these days, also easier to get caught (software etc).
rossd 11 1.1k England
24 Jul 2012 3:26PM

Quote:Who the ....is Wee Lizzy?


An Irish rock band which featured the late Phil Lynott as lead guitarist.................



oy maybe not Wink
redsnappa 12 2.0k United Kingdom
24 Jul 2012 7:08PM

Quote:this is where schools should be setting the foundations of what is right or wrong. Part of any ICT lessons should be preparing the future generations on how to use emerging technology


Staff at schools are probably more guilty as the kids, During assemblys and lessons teachers will often be using powerpoint presentations containing photos from google images and video from you tube.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.