Space Shuttle iphone photo: rights discussion

I thought this was an interesting read, especially the TwitPics info.

http://redtape.msnbc.m​sn.com …-when-is-sharing-stealing

short summary: if you don't want the world to have a photo, don't post it on the internet.

tomd wrote in post #12469120
I thought this was an interesting read, especially the TwitPics info.

http://redtape.msnbc.m​sn.com …-when-is-sharing-stealing

short summary: if you don't want the world to have a photo, don't post it on the internet.

Your comment misses the entire point of the discussion. If someone uses your photo without your permission and makes money from it, such as publication in a periodical as was the case here, then it's a violation of your intellectual property rights.

The internet is a great marketing tool and a lot of photographers would find business to be a lot more difficult without it. It's here and it isn't going to go away.

We, as photographers, have to work to dispel the generally held notion that just because it's on the internet somewhere, it's fair game to use without regard to ownership.

Actually....I think this is more accurately the "short summary"

Copying someone's work is so easy now, it's done in just about every industry...music, movies, photos...and no one bats an eye.

JWright wrote in post #12470100
We, as photographers, have to work to dispel the generally held notion that just because it's on the internet somewhere, it's fair game to use without regard to ownership.

agree with the original poster...

If you post something on the internet, expect it to get posted EVERYWHERE. This is why you should at least watermark everything you post on the internet... twitter, facebook, blogs, etc. No watermark = endless and rampant pirating

tomd wrote in post #12469120
short summary: if you don't want the world to have a photo, don't post it on the internet.

Brilliant.

In a case like this, is the image automatically copyrighted even if the person taking the picture hasn't entered that info into the metadata?

it's not really a good argument to just say "if you don't want your image to be used, don't put it out there". the average has no idea how photography copyrights/watermarks work and what can happen when they post images online without these safeguards.

You know, she could have submitted it to IStockPhoto and made 25cents for every download. Oh, wait. It probably would have been rejected by the screeners first.

The point of the article is, surprisingly, in defense of IP rights and photographers and (as I read it) kind of took the woman to task a little bit for being so cavalier with posting it.

The web is vital for photographers now but the point made above is valid. If you don't want it used for a purpose other than what you intend but you insist on putting it on the web, use the EXIF and IPTC fields, watermark it such that it would be difficult to remove without rendering the image useless, don't post at sizes people can use and register your images.