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


Sharing Photos on FB Bad Idea

Attention!

This topic is locked.

Reason : for further attention by the team


KevSB 10 1.4k 5 United Kingdom
8 Nov 2012 9:31PM

Quote:Seriously, isnt it all getting a bit childish?

Yeah, there is the 'put the money where your mouth is' issue, but come on, its becoming a bit schoolyard

Just sayin' Tongue


You may be right Paul but after starting the thread as someone concerned about image theft we now have a situation where something does not look right here and while semi amused by how this has unfolded.
we would like to hear from bugs what he has to say about the fact eather he is a thief himself or is the wronged party, surely after 6 pages we deserve an explanation.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

User_Removed 10 3.3k 4 United Kingdom
8 Nov 2012 11:05PM
Bugs will say that he's never claimed to be the original photographer and he borrowed the images believing them to be free to use and was quite happy to accept compliments like "A stunning piece of artwork" because hard work was done to convert the photo to 'digital art'.

It's all very amusing and good fun Smile
Carabosse e2
11 39.5k 269 England
8 Nov 2012 11:14PM
Bugs doesn't seem to be saying anything at all at present! Wink
AnneWorner e2
7 614 42 United States
9 Nov 2012 2:49AM
I haven't read through this whole thread yet, just the link posted initially, but if this has not been posted yet, these are the Statements of Rights and Responsibilities on Facebook.
KevSB 10 1.4k 5 United Kingdom
9 Nov 2012 8:17PM
As the op has chosen not to respond which is his right, should the site be worried that it may being used to showcase others work Althrough changed by using an effect . I suspect I'm not alone in wanting to see this issue cleared up.
The original work may well have been the ops work and I hope it is but if not should they be removed from the site. Once this is cleared up it may best if this thread is deleted as it does not show the site in good light by all our behaviour of which I admit to being part of
User_Removed 10 3.3k 4 United Kingdom
9 Nov 2012 9:51PM
I think it's been debated here before that digital art can often be made up from other people's stuff and be original enough. I think we need to give Bugs every opportunity to reply before deleting his work or closing the thread.
KevSB 10 1.4k 5 United Kingdom
9 Nov 2012 10:03PM
I'd not seen that discussion so did not realise that was the consensus which surprises me and must look it up. And I agree that he should have the right to reply.
whipspeed e2
10 4.0k 22 United Kingdom
9 Nov 2012 10:09PM
Maybe if other works are used to create an image, the original (if permission has been granted for it's use) should possibly be credited in tags or description. But yes, certainly the right to reply then close/delete the thread.
But if permission has not been given for the original image to be used, these should also be removed.
Carabosse e2
11 39.5k 269 England
10 Nov 2012 1:24AM

Quote:I think we need to give Bugs every opportunity to reply before deleting his work or closing the thread.


I entirely agree - he deserves to have the right of reply.

So, over to Bugs. Smile
Paul Morgan e2
13 15.7k 6 England
10 Nov 2012 1:32AM
Did he ever claim the photographs were his own ?
Carabosse e2
11 39.5k 269 England
10 Nov 2012 2:37AM
He doesn't have to. The assumption must surely be that anything posted in your portfolio is entirely your own work, and that you are not breaching anyone else's copyright and passing the work off as your own.

Doubt has obviously been cast on some of Bug's photos, which is incredibly ironic given the subject of this thread, which he started. No doubt he will clarify - although he appears to be avoiding this thread whilst still posting on others.
779HOB 2 1.0k United Kingdom
10 Nov 2012 7:44AM
I am not really sure why the thread needs to be deleted. I think it's a good example to others that EPZ take image ownership seriously and if you are into image theft then this might not be the place for you. I am not sure how bugs obtained the images, bugs may well have paid for them and have a licence to use has they have.


Quote:Did he ever claim the photographs were his own ?


I agree with Carabosse - the assumption is that we all only use our own or images we have permission to use. But like I say bugs may well have permission to use the photos. Or, in fact, those sites might have used his images.

It is possible that bugs has taken the original photos, uploaded them to the sites Chris has linked to and then added his own PS filters to them and uploaded here. Which of course would be totally ok.
User_Removed 10 3.3k 4 United Kingdom
10 Nov 2012 7:57AM
Maybe he's hidden this thread. I'm going to comment on the tiger image.
User_Removed 10 3.3k 4 United Kingdom
10 Nov 2012 8:01AM
LOL, Bugs has deleted or hidden all of those cartoonlike images.

That suggests that none of them were original and all the original photos had been used without permission. Bugs even had the cheek to add a signature to some!
779HOB 2 1.0k United Kingdom
10 Nov 2012 8:04AM

Quote:LOL, Bugs has deleted or hidden all of those cartoonlike images.


oops, not looking good. I think the thread should stay but wonder if the team should have a word.