Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Photo nicked AGAIN, should i try and get it removed ?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

janeez
janeez e2 Member 61182 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
18 Apr 2013 - 12:06 PM

Sad world we live in where there is a distinction between permitted levels of theft. We should all walk into Tesco's, Morrisons or wherever, help ourselves to a loaf of bread and then argue the point that it had been put on the shelf so therefore I could just take it! I wonder how far we would get with that argument.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
18 Apr 2013 - 12:06 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

KevSB
KevSB  101407 forum posts United Kingdom5 Constructive Critique Points
18 Apr 2013 - 12:14 PM


Quote: Sad world we live in where there is a distinction between permitted levels of theft. We should all walk into Tesco's, Morrisons or wherever, help ourselves to a loaf of bread and then argue the point that it had been put on the shelf so therefore I could just take it! I wonder how far we would get with that argument.

The difference is that Tesco's ect are private Property, The internet is public Domain so not quite a good comparison, Leave the food you bought at Tesco's in a public park unattended would be a better comparison. This does not make it right just how it works.

samueldilworth
18 Apr 2013 - 12:37 PM

A more pertinent difference is that Tesco is harmed (however slightly in comparison to the thief’s gain, but that gets into controversial Robin Hood territory) in a very concrete way when someone walks out with a stolen loaf of bread, whereas duplicating a digital file does not always harm the creator or owner (for instance in the case of a blogger who wouldn’t in a million years pay even a penny to use the photo).

Sometimes the creator is harmed, of course. That may be so in this case with Gay Lea Foods, or at least Gay Lea Foods should be made to pay after the fact for other reasons.

answersonapostcard
answersonapostcard Site Moderator 1012601 forum postsanswersonapostcard vcard United Kingdom15 Constructive Critique Points
18 Apr 2013 - 1:17 PM

http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/10-misconceptions-about-the-public-domain.html

janeez
janeez e2 Member 61182 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
18 Apr 2013 - 1:45 PM

The comparison is not the difference only the fact that theft is theft whatever way one wishes to dress it up. There are no degrees of theft it is all the same thing whether on a shops shelf, a public car park OR on the internet. If it didn't belong to you in the first place you should not just help yourself! The case of being in 'the public domain' just clouds the issue making something which, 60 years ago, would have been considered unacceptable.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could just put pictures out on the WWW and if someone wanted it they just asked first. Ah well, c'est la vie.

Last Modified By janeez at 18 Apr 2013 - 1:57 PM
keithh
keithh e2 Member 1022905 forum postskeithh vcard Wallis and Futuna31 Constructive Critique Points
18 Apr 2013 - 2:07 PM

That link refers to USA public domain.

There have always been Levels/Degrees of Theft. My punishment for stealing your car will be very different to the one for stealing your web hosted photo.

ade_mcfade
ade_mcfade e2 Member 1014781 forum postsade_mcfade vcard England216 Constructive Critique Points
18 Apr 2013 - 2:30 PM

nice big logo on yer shots - people nick them and bingo, free world-wide advertising Wink

get lots of nice metadata in them too of course - google likes that kinda thing

answersonapostcard
answersonapostcard Site Moderator 1012601 forum postsanswersonapostcard vcard United Kingdom15 Constructive Critique Points
18 Apr 2013 - 2:46 PM

some sites are stripping the metadata though... http://petapixel.com/2013/03/14/study-looks-into-whether-photo-websites-play-nic...

ade_mcfade
ade_mcfade e2 Member 1014781 forum postsade_mcfade vcard England216 Constructive Critique Points
18 Apr 2013 - 4:11 PM

cheeky sods...

flickr seem to be the worst...

faint watermark does the trick... unless you're uploading really dark shots... like I just did on facebook

LVanDhal
LVanDhal  1126 forum posts United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
18 Apr 2013 - 4:30 PM


Quote: What would you do if it was your work ?
(given that I am an amateur not a professional.)

I would move on ....get over it....don't let it take over your life.
I'm sure it's very good but it's only a picture....EPZ members weren't even keen on it.

.....just my opinion... sorry

Grin true, even the Original competition judges thought it was pants, it did'nt even make 3rd place Grin

I think thats why it gets to me a bit that it gets nicked so often, its like owning an old banger of a car that keeps getting stolen because it saves the thieves the cost of a taxi, and the police telling you "Well its an old banger you should be flatters that anyone wants to drive it, so think yourself lucky
the thieves were that desperate"

LVanDhal
LVanDhal  1126 forum posts United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
19 Apr 2013 - 4:26 PM

Well, things just got very interesting.......there have been email exchanges!!!
To be Continued.........( unless we arrive at a confidentiality clause)
But I would say from the progress I've made so far, it is worth pursuing.

janeez
janeez e2 Member 61182 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
20 Apr 2013 - 10:59 PM

Good for you. So glad you have pursued this and hopefully the result will now go in your favour. Smile

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.