Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Flench on March 23, 2012, 01:33:25 PM
-
Man I just spent 2 hour's making a video and went to post it on Photobucket and about half way throught it , it come up with the copy right BS on a CD that I PAID for , now wt-hey ? Never has before When they start this ?
-
Dunno, but just because you paid for a CD doesn't give you rights to copy the content and use it however you want. Just like if you bought a DVD movie and projected it on the side of a building for public display. You bought the right for private enjoyment of the content for yourself. It sucks, but that's how things are.
Most times, YouTube won't usually block movies if you give credit for the music or other content you used...so far. They will, however, block domains from accessing your movies because of copyright laws - like Europe not being able to view a movie because of music content (even with proper credits for such content).
-
If you don't like that, you'll HATE wal-mart's policy on making prints from high quality digital images. If you take them an image that looks "too good", they assume that you couldn't have possibly taken it yourself and they require proof that some professional photographer has released copyright to you.
My wife had a half-dozen images rejected by wal-mart that way. The images had no copyright logo or anything on them, and had been pulled from a CD we received from a photographer for the express purpose of making prints. Since we submitted them for printing online, they needed the CD or some other proof that we had image duplication rights. We didn't have the CD with us since they had never required this proof on similar print orders before, so we cancelled the order and will just have some other shop do the printing. Kind of annoying, but although the images were "clean" they still required physical proof of copyright release.
And maybe next time I'll run the files through a metadata scrubber... That might help. We did the order online just to avoid having to carry the CD around where it might get scratched or lost, and the CD cost a lot of money so it's worth protecting.
-
that's why I started hosting my pics on my own site. I got tired of photobuckets random nonsense
-
My wife had a half-dozen images rejected by wal-mart that way. The images had no copyright logo or anything on them, and had been pulled from a CD we received from a photographer for the express purpose of making prints. Since we submitted them for printing online, they needed the CD or some other proof that we had image duplication rights. We didn't have the CD with us since they had never required this proof on similar print orders before, so we cancelled the order and will just have some other shop do the printing. Kind of annoying, but although the images were "clean" they still required physical proof of copyright release.
You got hosed by the photographer in this case. He should have known that you would need a physical written copy right release. Sounds like he was too lazy to provide good customer service. The people at Wal Mart were protecting the photographers rights. It is incumbent on the photographer to provide the release. The Wal Mart folks did exactly what they were supposed to do.
-
hey Dave, clear something up for me, I occasionally dabble with PS just for the heck of it. Most of the time it's to make a funny picture of someone or something like that. Is using all or just part of a pic w/o express consent still infringement? Everything I put on the web I hope somebody likes enough to use again but that's not how I make my living you know?
-
hey Dave, clear something up for me, I occasionally dabble with PS just for the heck of it. Most of the time it's to make a funny picture of someone or something like that. Is using all or just part of a pic w/o express consent still infringement? Everything I put on the web I hope somebody likes enough to use again but that's not how I make my living you know?
Not always, but in most cases it probably is infringement. Copyright law is pretty easy to find if you google it. If you want to allow stuff you have made ot be used by anyone, just say so when you post stuff up.
-
I always do :)
And I have googled it numerous times after I realized that my opinions were based on out dated laws. Can't say I always agree with the current laws but I can understand the logic behind them.
-
Can't say I always agree with the current laws but I can understand the logic behind them.
Well, those of us who make our living with our cameras appreciate your understanding. :salute
-
Well, those of us who make our living with our cameras appreciate your understanding. :salute
+1
I've had many requests from random people who want to use some photo off my website for personal use, or even several for a commercial use on a calender or book. I always respond by pointing out where the I have both hi and low res digital downloads with either a personal or commercial use license listed for sale right under all the different print sizes when you click "Buy This Photo".
So far I've only had one actually buy it. :(
As for Wal-Mart and the photo CD, I quit selling photos on CD a few years ago, but when I did I included a personal use license document right on the CD. I quit selling CDs however after somebody entered a picture of his pet Labrador (which I took, and sold to him on CD) in a local amateur pet store sponsored photo contest as his own photo, and won. :rolleyes: Also I decided I didn't want my photos to be reflected poorly because of cheap home printers or crappy Wally world prints.
-
Well, those of us who make our living with our cameras appreciate your understanding. :salute
:salute
Still going to ps your head on a llama some day :lol
-
I included a personal use license document right on the CD.
This is how I have always done it also. I even have the document sized as a 4x6 so the photo finisher can print a copy for their files right on their photo printers.
-
Well how can photobucket tell that music I am running ?
-
In all fairness, the photographer included the copyright release on either the CD or the CD jacket. The problem I had was that Wal-mart had not enforced this requirement in the past, and the online submission site and process did not make it obvious that we would need to physically carry the copyright release to the store in order to pick up the prints.
In the past, we submitted the pics and picked them up, no questions asked. Since we don't steal stuff and don't violate photographer copyrights, we thought that this was "normal". We've used this wal-mart print shop and printed images from the same photographer before, so it was a big surprise when they suddenly started enforcing a rule that wasn't obviously posted anywhere.
-
In all fairness, the photographer included the copyright release on either the CD or the CD jacket. The problem I had was that Wal-mart had not enforced this requirement in the past, and the online submission site and process did not make it obvious that we would need to physically carry the copyright release to the store in order to pick up the prints.
In the past, we submitted the pics and picked them up, no questions asked. Since we don't steal stuff and don't violate photographer copyrights, we thought that this was "normal". We've used this wal-mart print shop and printed images from the same photographer before, so it was a big surprise when they suddenly started enforcing a rule that wasn't obviously posted anywhere.
Take it as a sign to stop getting Wal-Mart prints.
In my experience Wal-Mart prints suck anyway, you will no doubt get far better prints, and better customer service if you find a decent photo lab. You may not notice it unless you compare side-by-side with a good print, but when you do you'll notice Wal Mart prints have lost shadows, blown highlights, blacks that aren't really black and even messed up color temperature.
I got some quick prints I needed on the road once from a Wal-Mart, and could tell immediately the color was way off (average Caucasian skin was orange). When I got home and compared them with prints from the same file I got from my regular lab (Bay Photo online) I was blown away with how poor they where.
I'd stay away from the Ritz/Inkleys/Wolf chain as well, I've had miserable experience with them, including lost 6x7 negatives on 2 separate occasions with no compensation, and sales people that flat out lied and made stuff up.
-
and how did this post get simi off topic ? I was getting my print's done with photobucket untill this last deal with the copy rights stuff happpen .
-
Flench,
I think the point to be made out of the discussion is that many companies are aggressively protecting not only their own copyrights, but also copyrights of other people. Certainly, buying a CD does not automatically convey the right to make duplicates or even view the contents in any way other than how it is spelled out in the license agreement. Which was the point I was discussing where wal-mart made me prove that the CD full of images I had came with a license to make prints of the images on that CD.
If photobucket's restriction is in error, then you need to provide them with proof that you actually have the right to copy, modify, distribute, or whatever you're doing to the contents of that CD. If you can't provide proof, then photobucket is bound by law to not provide you with any services that may violate someone's copyright.
Yea it sucks for people making legit copies but enough people make illegal copies (and enough content providers restrict their "sold" content to the point where it is nearly impossible to use or view that content legally) that powerful companies and associations basically bribed a ton of congressmen/women into passing very restrictive laws on digital copyright enforcement. While you can argue that these laws protect both large and small content producers, it also had the effect of making it perfectly legal for a media production company to "sell" you a CD full of stuff that you can't really use because they didn't really sell you the CD, they sold you a license to use the CD in a manner specified by a lengthy legal document that nobody understands. In extreme cases, simply putting that CD into your computer could constitute a violation that could result in many thousands of dollars in fines or even a jail term.
The problem is that the rules are so draconian that even innocent people are affected, sometimes badly. And other companies that deal with content have to be super careful about what they allow to be moved/copied/distributed/viewed with their services or they could get sued too, even if there was no intentional or actual theft involved.
So basically you have only a few options, assuming you have the rights you say you do (to get prints or a video made from a CD). You could prove to photobucket that you have the rights you claim, and they MIGHT help you out. Or you could find another print service.
Or, if you want to join the ever growing ranks of the digital criminal elite, you could copy the images to your computer, use any (free) photo editing software to delete all image meta-data which is often where details like the photographer's name and copyright restrictions are stored, save the scrubbed files, and then re-attempt to get the freshly scrubbed images printed. This is of course highly illegal and can actually earn you jail time (yea really), but sometimes that's the only way around incorrectly applied copyright restrictions. But remember, even if you actually own copyright on an image, if you are not the original creator of that image then you may be forbidden by federal law to modify the image in any way, including removing file meta-data. If you don't like that, write your congressman and complain, realizing that if your complaint is not accompanied by several million dollars in annual campaign contributions, the congressman will not help you one bit since that's what it took to get the original law passed.
-
I see.
-
This will only get worse. They are just following the law. If you host them yourself and do not control copyright then you'll suffer the expensive consequences.
-
In all fairness, the photographer included the copyright release on either the CD or the CD jacket. The problem I had was that Wal-mart had not enforced this requirement in the past, and the online submission site and process did not make it obvious that we would need to physically carry the copyright release to the store in order to pick up the prints.
In the past, we submitted the pics and picked them up, no questions asked. Since we don't steal stuff and don't violate photographer copyrights, we thought that this was "normal". We've used this wal-mart print shop and printed images from the same photographer before, so it was a big surprise when they suddenly started enforcing a rule that wasn't obviously posted anywhere.
Well, sounds like somebody wasn't doing their job before... Then they started doing their job.
As for the quality of prints at Wal Mart, over the years I have traveled extensively to work and have gotten quick prints at various 1 Hour Photo Labs. I've always found that Wal Mart labs are really hit and miss. You will find some that are printing garbage and occaisionally you'll find one that is putting out good work.
I've actually found Walgreens stores to have pretty good consistency from store to store.
That said, I rarely get prints for customers anywhere but my one of my favorite pro labs. I just use 1 Hour Labs if the client needs proofs in a hurry, or I want to see something in print prior to having the real prints made.
-
+1
I've had many requests from random people who want to use some photo off my website for personal use, or even several for a commercial use on a calender or book. I always respond by pointing out where the I have both hi and low res digital downloads with either a personal or commercial use license listed for sale right under all the different print sizes when you click "Buy This Photo".
So far I've only had one actually buy it. :(
As for Wal-Mart and the photo CD, I quit selling photos on CD a few years ago, but when I did I included a personal use license document right on the CD. I quit selling CDs however after somebody entered a picture of his pet Labrador (which I took, and sold to him on CD) in a local amateur pet store sponsored photo contest as his own photo, and won. :rolleyes: Also I decided I didn't want my photos to be reflected poorly because of cheap home printers or crappy Wally world prints.
Ever done any google image searches for shats and gags to see if anyone is bogarting your stuff?