Derivative works

Has it ever occurred to anyone here that, when a member has posted a copyrighted work, for illustration of a technique, for information, to solicit critique, or just to share, that making a derivative work from it (without license to do so) may constitute infringement of the copyright?

I know that often the preparation of an edited version of a posted image is done with the best of motives. Still, here we rightly hold to a high standard of respect for a photographer's rights, and a high standard of respect for the legal frameworks of protection of those rights. We should perhaps not be so sanguine about breaching those frameworks "just between us".

Then again, perhaps the doctrine of "fair use" (which we all understand so clearly) embraces such cases.

Hi Doug,

I think that in most cases we all understand and appreciate the effort that others have put into creating such 'derivative works', and have given either explicit or implicit approval to the process. I am comfortable where the derivative is not commercial and within the group. Of course, if someone doesn't want people to try to help in this way, or to explore alternative approaches, that is fine and they can comment either before or after as required. Any offending pieces can be removed.

A more serious concern would be the theft of work for commerical (or other) purposes. But we all run that risk if we post images at all, and of course even our commercial websites are not immune.

Mike

Asher was concerned that my raising the issue here at this time meant that I was annoyed that he created a derivative work from a pair of images I had posted on another section of the forum.

Not at all, but it did bring to mind the issue.

Best regards,

Doug

I don't do it because I can't control who sees it. To post an edit here, i have to first put it on a public server elsewhere (Pbase, Flickr, etc.)

Asher doesn't have this problem!

Winston Mitchell said:

I don't do it because I can't control who sees it. To post an edit here, i have to first put it on a public server elsewhere (Pbase, Flickr, etc.)

Asher doesn't have this problem!

Click to expand...

We'll solve that soon, I hope. That's an issue that supports the idea of hosting here.

Asher

Doug_Kerr said:

Then again, perhaps the doctrine of "fair use" (which we all understand so clearly) embraces such cases.

Click to expand...

Exactly, it does. The derivative is for study and discussion with the Copyright holder, therefore no issue.

If the Copyright holder requests so, the copy will be removed by one of the Moderators.

Cheers,
Bart

Bart_van_der_Wolf said:

Exactly, it does. The derivative is for study and discussion with the Copyright holder, therefore no issue.

If the Copyright holder requests so, the copy will be removed by one of the Moderators.

Cheers,
Bart

Click to expand...

Viewers on the host server have no knowledge that it is a derivative or what its purpose is.

Winston Mitchell said:

I don't do it because I can't control who sees it. To post an edit here, i have to first put it on a public server elsewhere (Pbase, Flickr, etc.)

Asher doesn't have this problem!

Click to expand...

if you have your own server and link from here to it, just people looking at OPF can see it.

Basically I don't understand the problem:
if I dont want to have derivates or publicity, just don't show in the internet (it happens for some of my work) or just ask for critic but no edits. I'm sure that everbody will respect it.

Michael Fontana said:

if you have your own server and link from here to it, just people looking at OPF can see it.

Basically I don't understand the problem:
if I dont want to have derivates or publicity, just don't show in the internet (it happens for some of my work) or just ask for critic but no edits. I'm sure that everbody will respect it.

Click to expand...

The problem is this: If I edit your image, for the edit to be visible here, I have to post it somewhere else and link to it. For all you know, I put the edited picture of your mom on porn site.

I want to know where my images appear and I assume everyone else here does too. That's why I don't edit other members' work.

I let Asher edit my images because he hosts his edits here.

Winston Mitchell said:

......I want to know where my images appear and I assume everyone else here does too. That's why I don't edit other members' work......

Click to expand...

Winston, in the end, you can' really control images, once you showed them in the internet - no matter where you host them. You could download Asher's picts and upload to another server anytime...

..............

When i dont know something i have no problem admitting it...The problem though is theres a LOT i dont know and any one of you is a great deal smarter then myself....

So by derivative work do you mean someone elses picture that another person modified or edited and then post to see what others think???.....I wouldnt think thats what you mean but if it is something like thats wayyyyyy wrong....I'd never alter another photographers image...thats the kind of thing that really gets me very angry...

I had shot with this model, back in my early pre-editing days when i could'nt edit to save my butt and this other photographer not only re-edited my images but he put his name on them in a big water mark.....I went through the roof...I first called the model and every other word started with F.......Then I sent him, the photographer a note and just lit him up and threatented him with both legal and physical harm.....

The images did get pulled and then a week later some were back up on her page....I called him and told him there was 20 minutes to have those images gone or in 20 minutes he'd be hearing from a lawyer....She was away in Vegas so i guess he got her password from her and went into her account and removed them.....I became in her eyes this unreasonable a***hole photographer...That i can live with...Someone elses name in bold print on my images.....Nooooooo not gonna happen....

Well how would you feel if someone put THIER name on YOUR image after they made some modifications to it????

Some re-toucher took on of my images and messed with it and i just told him NEVER to touch any of my images again.....If you have permission directly from the photographer thats one thing but without asking is wrong....

ErikJonas said:

So by derivative work do you mean someone elses picture that another person modified or edited and then post to see what others think???...

Click to expand...

Not really. A derivative work is a concept that's addressed in the Copyright Act. It's a new original work, (partly) based on someone else's, published as one's own.
Here one could call a modified version of a posted image a derivative work, but it's not (in the sense of the copyright act).

Well how would you feel if someone put THIER name on YOUR image after they made some modifications to it????

Click to expand...

When published as an original work of art, it would probably be an infringement of someone's Copyright. However, there's a clause in the copyright act that describes several uses of an existing work (of art) that don't infringe on one's Copyright.

Cheers,
Bart


P.S. If you want to get a better grip on legal matters, then I suggest to at least read the Copyright Act for your geography (before consulting an attorney/lawyer), but also understand that different geographies have (slightly) different versions. In general the USA copyright act seems to focus more on mercantile rights, whereas the "Berne" (Switzerland) signatories focus on intellectual property (and their monetary 'derivatives' ;-) ).

Michael Fontana said:

Winston, in the end, you can' really control images, once you showed them in the internet - no matter where you host them. You could download Asher's picts and upload to another server anytime...

Click to expand...

I know and understand it better than most. That doesn't mean I think it should be encouraged.

If you do a Google image-search for "soccer ball" or "soccerball" you will find a CAD rendering that I did in 2001 at or near the top of the list. It's been in that position since shortly after I published it. If you dig deep in the listings, it shows up on many soccer sites as a site or page logo, usually with the copyright intact. Some users sought my permission (and got it) and some didn't. I don't make a stink unless the copyright is clipped off. I still get a few emails a year about it.

...........

Winston not to get too off topic but did you see that female soccer player in the news that spent the game beating the crap out of other players?...She blames it on being emotionally caught up in the game...Yeah whatever....If you dont know what i'm refering to >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdvAFCeOsGU

She did a lot more then whats shown in this clip...Shes suspended permitately i believe....

Sorry to get side tracked Winston....

ErikJonas said:

Winston not to get too off topic but did you see that female soccer player in the news that spent the game beating the crap out of other players?...She blames it on being emotionally caught up in the game...Yeah whatever....If you dont know what i'm refering to >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdvAFCeOsGU

She did a lot more then whats shown in this clip...Shes suspended permitately i believe....

Sorry to get side tracked Winston....

Click to expand...

Erik,

Hello! Look at the topic of the first post! This isn't about that either, LOL!

Asher

.............

I know Asher...Just the mention of soccer made me think of that.....Sorry i am just very random...

Just to make it clear, pictures posted here are assumed to be the original work of the poster unless otherwise stated. Reusing other folks work, without attribution is not allowed. Where you don't know the person well, ask permission before editing a picture and reposting it here. If a picture is edited, even at the request of the photographer, part of the conditions here is that all the rights of that new work is assigned without charge to the original © holder.

Pictures posted here are licensed for use within OPF, but the photographer always retains the copyright. So a picture posted once in OPF can be used for editorial comment anywhere in OPF. That's commonly done when daughter threads are started to separate a new topic.

Asher

Hi, Asher,

Asher Kelman said:

Just to make it clear, pictures posted here are assumed to be the original work of the poster unless otherwise stated. Reusing other folks work, without attribution is not allowed. Where you don't know the person well, ask permission before editing a picture and reposting it here. If a picture is edited, even at the request of the photographer, part of the conditions here is that all the rights of that new work is assigned without charge to the original © holder.

Pictures posted here are licensed for use within OPF, but the photographer always retains the copyright. So a picture posted once in OPF can be used for editorial comment anywhere in OPF. That's commonly done when daughter threads are started to separate a new topic.

Click to expand...

Nicely put. Thanks.

Best regards,

Doug

Doug_Kerr said:

Has it ever occurred to anyone here that, when a member has posted a copyrighted work, for illustration of a technique, for information, to solicit critique, or just to share, that making a derivative work from it (without license to do so) may constitute infringement of the copyright?

Click to expand...

I think it's a silly concern really. If you are really that worried about copyright issues and other people saving and tweaking your images then don't post your images online, and there will be alot less people who have access to your images


You can't really say "don't save or manipulate my images, it's copyright infringement!" and expect the crowds of people on the internet to really obey your wish. And to my way of thinking, it's a bit of a silly and useless request unless you are prepared and willing to actually do something about it. Putting your name/copyright on the bottom of the photos is plenty, I think. (and even then, I sometimes question why I do it, haha!) But if you start reciting the law books every time you post an image, I think you'll have alot of people loose interest in you and your work, regardless of how good the work is.

Here's something alittle funny

At the end of the day, I think Daniel's observations are spot on. When I tell Afghans what a new-release DVD costs in the United States, they are staggered. Commercial copies of watches, handbags, software, jeans, file sharing, identity theft, ad nauseum. The concept of protected works is one that is not universally appreciated, understood, or enforced. The only real protection a photographer who exhibits work on the internet enjoys is that low-resolution small file sizes are not, generally, commercially viable.

It would appear that the ability to reach a large audience cheaply does not come without its own, possibly dear, cost.

Wendy