#clock #bell it's"time"for a question and discussion about photo credits and ownership,and sorry if this is a repeat...
#clock #bell it's"time"for a question and discussion about photo credits and ownership,and sorry if this is a repeat topic. I've noticed that some people put their names on pictures (usually in the bottom corner) and some don't . I'm not looking to sell pictures but credit would be nice if someone wanted to use the picture for something?.what do you think .? By the way,I like this picture too, enjoying photography is why I do this. Thank-you.
It's an interesting question. In the US, your works are assumed to be copyrighted, unless expressed otherwise. This of course does not stop someone else from using the picture anyways, once it is published in any manner.
ReplyDeleteFor myself, I use the "Fair Use" philosophy. I assume unless stated otherwise, that a picture posted here on G+ has a implied approval to be re-shared on G+. I do not think it is ethical to use it otherwise, without permission. Making money off of it, or claiming it as your own works is defiantly wrong.
If I re-share, I try and keep as much information as I can with the photo. It will at least have the source of the photo. If you re-share one of mine, I would ask the same.
As far aesthetics, I believe that in many cases, a name plate or watermark, lessens the impact of the photo. I certainly understand that some want the protection or promotion of one though. Everyone should at least think about it, and decide for themselves if they wish to mark their photo itself.
You may not be aware, but there is in almost all photos "EXIF" or "Metadata" information recorded in the pictures. What data may vary, but with either the camera itself, or the photo editing software, it is possible to put your name contact info, and copyright information, and possibly a lot more textual data.
There is even a way of encrypting text data, such as copyright, into the structure of the photo itself. You cannot visually see this, and even if the photo is edited, and metadata stripped from the photo, it is still readable with the right software. It can be valuable if you wish to take legal proceedings against an unauthorized use.
I believe any person has an understanding of what is fair to do or not, just as they have the ability to ignore that.
Well, do put my name on most of my pictures to identify my works. Most micro stock or stock agencies would ask you to remove any ownership from the work you intend to sell - simply because you do sell your ownership. Some stocks would go even farther and buy all the raw files from you or ask you to agree to selling through their agency/site exclusively.
ReplyDeleteGood points Michael Mossiagin. If you ever sell a picture, be REAL SURE of all the details, You could end up not even being legally able to use it for anything else, even 'personal'.
ReplyDeleteThere are many thousands photos of that I took, that the government owns. I have no control over their use, and no rights to them. However, I knew this ahead of time. So it is OK.
Ok, thanks so much for the reply. I was just wondering, for one thing some people spend a lot of time and money on equipment,learning the art,technology,and travelling,to take these great pictures we see here on G+. To get no credit would be sad for many. Enjoy what you do right,and thank-you again.
ReplyDelete