Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Weddings & Other Family Events 
Thread started 20 Mar 2017 (Monday) 18:44
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What do you think about this Idea?

 
OhLook
Spiderwoman
Avatar
18,109 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5487
Joined Dec 2012
Location: California: SF Bay Area
     
Mar 26, 2017 18:19 |  #16

Colin Glover wrote in post #18311667 (external link)
If I'd just typed the words onto a blank page, would that be theft?

It may seem to you like fair use. However, avoiding unauthorized use of copyrighted lyrics is important. ASCAP is real twitchy about that.


PRONOUN ADVISORY: OhLook is a she. | A FEW CORRECT SPELLINGS: lens, aperture, amateur, hobbyist, per se, raccoon, whoa, more so (2 wds.), shoo-in | IMAGE EDITING OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Colin ­ Glover
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,369 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 125
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Mar 27, 2017 07:30 |  #17

I see. As it's in UK only, and Ascap is only US based, then surely it has no jurisdiction? It would be the UK equivalent wouldn't it? If I was selling these as prints online to all and sundry, maybe I'd be liable, but I'm not. Fair use is a reasonable defence.


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
OhLook
Spiderwoman
Avatar
18,109 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5487
Joined Dec 2012
Location: California: SF Bay Area
     
Mar 27, 2017 10:39 |  #18

Colin Glover wrote in post #18312122 (external link)
I see. As it's in UK only, and Ascap is only US based, then surely it has no jurisdiction?

Some of the musicians at POTN would be better positioned than I to inform you on this point. An intellectual property lawyer would be even better. My guess, strictly as an amateur when it comes to law, is that if ASCAP had no jurisdiction over what happens overseas, it could never collect fees from blatant pirating in the form of bootleg recordings, for example, made outside the U.S. "Jurisdiction" may not even be the right word. Courts have jurisdiction.


PRONOUN ADVISORY: OhLook is a she. | A FEW CORRECT SPELLINGS: lens, aperture, amateur, hobbyist, per se, raccoon, whoa, more so (2 wds.), shoo-in | IMAGE EDITING OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,894 posts
Likes: 2111
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Mar 27, 2017 11:25 |  #19

Actually, when I brought it up back in post #8 I wasn't even thinking about the music copyright itself but I was thinking more as a photographer and wondering who owns the copyright of the image of the music. When I Googled most of the images are *.png's so I would think someone has the copyright of the image unless it truly is in the public domain.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ksbal
Goldmember
Avatar
2,745 posts
Gallery: 374 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 2371
Joined Sep 2010
Location: N.E. Kansas
     
Mar 27, 2017 12:02 as a reply to  @ gjl711's post |  #20

Ok, I'll ask, why does the format of the image (png) mean it is more likely to be copyrighted?


Godox/Flashpoint r2 system, plus some canon stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,894 posts
Likes: 2111
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Mar 27, 2017 12:07 |  #21

ksbal wrote in post #18312322 (external link)
Ok, I'll ask, why does the format of the image (png) mean it is more likely to be copyrighted?

Photographer always owns the copyright by default. So whoever presses the button on the camera owns the image. But I'm speculating that the images were probably scanned and I have no idea who owns the copyright in those cases. Maybe someone else can chime in.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ksbal
Goldmember
Avatar
2,745 posts
Gallery: 374 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 2371
Joined Sep 2010
Location: N.E. Kansas
     
Mar 27, 2017 14:08 |  #22

gjl711 wrote in post #18312330 (external link)
Photographer always owns the copyright by default. So whoever presses the button on the camera owns the image.

I understand this as well.

gjl711 wrote in post #18312330 (external link)
But I'm speculating that the images were probably scanned and I have no idea who owns the copyright in those cases. Maybe someone else can chime in.

but I'm still not seeing the connection between the png format = copyright

I guess my point is I don't think the format of the image (tiff/jpg/jpeg/png/gif​/psd/pdf/cr2 etc) has anything to do with the copyright status. Many images are ported around and end up as png's, regardless of their original format. But I'm willing to be educated if there is something special about a png file.


Godox/Flashpoint r2 system, plus some canon stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,894 posts
Likes: 2111
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Mar 27, 2017 14:14 |  #23

ksbal wrote in post #18312444 (external link)
...

but I'm still not seeing the connection between the png format = copyright

I guess my point is I don't think the format of the image (tiff/jpg/jpeg/png/gif​/psd/pdf/cr2 etc) has anything to do with the copyright status. Many images are ported around and end up as png's, regardless of their original format. But I'm willing to be educated if there is something special about a png file.

It's an image and not a document such as a .pdf, .doc, .pptx, etc. If it were a document than the copyright rules governing the use of print would apply I think but as many/most of these are .png or even .jpg, they are images so I am making the assumption that someone owns the copyright of the image. It's just speculation on my part as I am not a copyright lawyer.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kjonnnn
Goldmember
1,204 posts
Likes: 86
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
Mar 27, 2017 19:56 as a reply to  @ post 18311667 |  #24

Copyright of music involves more than performance. Public display is part of the copyright. I only brought it up because it seems like something you want to do regularly, and the music would be permanently in the photographs, which I'm sure you'd market as your idea of using music. What are the chances you'd be caught? Probably small. But I was just trying to mention that replication, duplication, or even projection of the copyrighted music "can" be a violation. As a photographer, I figured you'd be as respectful of other artists' rights as you expect of yours.

http://www.bitlaw.com/​copyright/scope.html (external link)

http://goodattorneysat​law.com/right-to-public-display/ (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BlackBull
Senior Member
Avatar
578 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 366
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Lancashire
     
Mar 31, 2017 04:23 |  #25

Just my 2p worth but this is just a poor image made 10x worse by adding the overlay. It really doesn't work at all for me.


Lancashire Wedding Photographer ǀ Rob Georgeson Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,528 views & 18 likes for this thread
What do you think about this Idea?
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Weddings & Other Family Events 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is James Kim
399 guests, 304 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.