Editing of others images - Discussion from RPT XXXVIII

pete4130

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Surely someone should be able to post their image with their copyright in tact and have reasonable expectation that it won't be lifted?

Well, if not precluded from posting, it should be at the photographers discretion with the expectation that someone won't lift the image and do stuff with it.

They should be able to, but it's the internet and it happens. Some people are ignorant, some people don't care. Anything put online is subject to being taken by someone else.

Expectations and reality are far removed from each other on the internet at times.

AnCatDubh

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Reasonable expectations? I think the reasonable expectations are the opposite of what you are implying.

And I think that's where we'd have a notable disagreement in this argument.

The internet has become a parody of real life. It's not uncommon that people post pictures/videos/etc. online in the hope that someone will modify it and it'll be and it'll "go viral" and be an "internet hit".

We all know about the Cool Vids, Pics and Links forum. We all know about the 4Chan boards, and we all know about the parody/satire versions of TV shows and films that decorate Youtube. There are thousands of sites dedicated solely to ripping the piss out of things.

When you put something online, on a massively popular forum (such as Boards.ie) I think that you must accept that there is the possibility that it will be edited and/or stolen.

I don't like reporting copyright infringement to Facebook, for example (though it's not often I do, only if something is malicious or has a watermark removed) but a lot of my photos to a fair bit of travelling on there (and across the web).

A photo I'd taken a while ago, of a red traffic light that was like a love heart, appeared to me several times on Facebook. People were 'sharing' and 'liking' it because some moron put some 'inspirational' text across it.


If you feel wronged, then go for it: Fire off complaints, write letters, google how to make a bomb, whatever you like. But you have to accept that it's part and parcel of the internet and that's just the way it is.


Our OP is clearly of the opinion that these photographs are very sensitive and she feels that the (in no way malicious) editing of her photo could leave her in trouble with the people she took the photos for. If you think that's going to be the case, keep the photos off the net. It's not difficult.


I've photographed a lot of stuff where I decided to use my discretion and keep the photos away from boards or facebook or the likes because I felt they were of a somewhat sensitive nature.


Even if the OP was under the impression that no one on here would edit her photos; boards shows up on Google searches and image searches anyway, so the photos could be seen by anyone at all, regardless of whether they even heard of boards or not.

magicbastarder

Deleted User wrote: »

Even if the OP was under the impression that no one on here would edit her photos; boards shows up on Google searches and image searches anyway, so the photos could be seen by anyone at all, regardless of whether they even heard of boards or not.

it was showing up on page 5 of a google image search earlier using the search term 'irish army ranger'.

randylonghorn

Paulw wrote: »

I would have thought the moral of the story is not to use someone's image without their expressed permission in the first place?? :rolleyes:

While I couldn't disagree with you on moral or ethical grounds, Paul, you do realise that you're flying in the face of decades of experience of how things happen on the 'net? :pac:

In all seriousness, I suppose what I'm saying is that using a bit of common sense never goes amiss.



(@ACD: wanna tutorial in multi-quote?! :cool:)

AnCatDubh

randylonghorn wrote: »

(@ACD: wanna tutorial in multi-quote?! :cool:)

The boards multi quote monkey said noooooo when I went to multi quote the volume of posts

I'll check more often in future :P

tororosso

pete4130 wrote: »

They should be able to, but it's the internet and it happens. Some people are ignorant, some people don't care. Anything put online is subject to being taken by someone else.

Expectations and reality are far removed from each other on the internet at times.

Doesn't matter if it's the internet or not. The photo belongs to the photographer and no permission was given for it to be stolen, modfied, and reproduced online. You can't just do whatever you want online just because it is the internet; rules still apply.

pete4130

tororosso wrote: »

Doesn't matter if it's the internet or not. The photo belongs to the photographer and no permission was given for it to be stolen, modfied, and reproduced online. You can't just do whatever you want online just because it is the internet; rules still apply.

Why are you quoting/arguing against my point? You've basically repeated what I've said.

I said people should be able to post and not worry about it. Thats the rule that should be applied. The fact is it does happen online, no matter how many forum posts you write saying rules still apply. Thats the hard reality of it, that the rules don't always apply.

In this instance it was an innocent gesture blown out of proportion and has been resolved.

Thankfully, hopefully after your post letting the internet that rules still apply on here will help stop any online theft of images in the future....we are saved :P

magicbastarder

no-one is arguing against the end of copyright on the internet. the divisive issue has been the proportionality of the reaction.

tororosso

pete4130 wrote: »

Why are you quoting/arguing against my point? You've basically repeated what I've said.

I said people should be able to post and not worry about it. Thats the rule that should be applied. The fact is it does happen online, no matter how many forum posts you write saying rules still apply. Thats the hard reality of it, that the rules don't always apply.

In this instance it was an innocent gesture blown out of proportion and has been resolved.

Thankfully, hopefully after your post letting the internet that rules still apply on here will help stop any online theft of images in the future....we are saved :P

I think we are more or less on the same wavelength here! People might take it for granted that they can "lift" photos off the internet and do whatever they want with them which is why the culture of doing it exists. However, this is why I feel it is good that Lisa made an issue of it. The initial post seemed to be an acknowledgement that they knew they had no right to touch the photo but also hoping that Lisa would not be bothered so the act would therefore be legitimised. I think anybody using flickr or pix.ie or any other specialised photo hosting site is fully aware of issues surrounding photography and copyright issues.

Tallon

tororosso wrote: »

I think anybody using flickr or pix.ie or any other specialised photo hosting site is fully aware of issues surrounding photography and copyright issues.

I wouldn't think that at all!

tororosso

Tallon wrote: »

I wouldn't think that at all!

When you sign up to flickr any photo you post up has to be assigned one of a number of copyright licencing terms (e.g creative commons or all rights reserved). I am sure pix.ie is the same. By using it you are implying an understanding of the licencing terms you are attributing to the photo you post up.

Tallon

tororosso wrote: »

When you sign up to flickr any photo you post up has to be assigned one of a number of copyright licencing terms (e.g creative commons or all rights reserved). I am sure pix.ie is the same. By using it you are implying an understanding of the licencing terms you are attributing to the photo you post up.

That's small print, you said that you assume anyone using these sites are "fully aware of issues surrounding photography and copyright issues."

That is not true, some people just click accept and upload photos.. I'm just pointing out that it's too broad of a statement to make!

tororosso

Tallon wrote: »

That's small print, you said that you assume anyone using these sites are "fully aware of issues surrounding photography and copyright issues."

That is not true, some people just click accept and upload photos.. I'm just pointing out that it's too broad of a statement to make!

It's not just the terms and conditions upon signing up. Every photo put up has to be assigned a licencing term. Simply clicking and claiming ignorance of copyright issues does not hold up. Anyone who uses these services is implicitly acknowledging that they are aware of the terms they are using them under and the licencing arrangement they are granting for each photo they post. Anyway, what I said was based in the context of the poster who put Lisa's modified photo up!

milos

magicbastarder wrote: »

to be fair, i'd be fairly certain it was put on flickr simply so it could be embedded into his post on boards; the 'embed image directly into a post' option does not actually show the image (unless that's functionality added in the new site layout).

To all who have contributed to this tread may I please state that i posted the offending picture.
For this I have apologised a number of times and have removed the picture not only from the net but also from my own computer.

The reason it was on flickr is as stated above by magicbastarder.

I also only get to check my computer in the evening or on seldom days off so that is why it took some hours to remove the image from flickr.

May I suggest to help avoid this happening again the moderators can look at a way of us marking pictures as ok to edit or not to edit.

I did my edit purely for fun and for that I again apologise to Lisa. No harm was meant

milos

Tallon wrote: »

When you say provoked in private, do you mean through PM by the user that Photoshoped the photo?

If this is the case, then you can report the PM using the report button and it will be dealt with by the Admins

I have NEVER sent a pm to Lisa and I would NEVER disrespect another poster

lisatiffany

milos wrote: »

I have NEVER sent a pm to Lisa and I would NEVER disrespect another poster

It wasn't milos who provoked me, we calmly talked about what happened and it was fine. What happened was once this thread went up I got a number of messages from more than one person who thought it was best I drop the issue and just let it go because of this and that. It was internet bravery by someone who is all mouth when they don't have to say something to your face.

Milos never did anything like that, it was quite the opposite in fact someone else messaged just yesterday saying how they agreed with what I said but wouldn't say it in public because they have been slammed in the past. It's stupid when you can't say what you think for fear of someone ridiculing it, but I can understand that now because I've seen it myself.

Tallon

Poor form that you were harassed through pm

I'd definitely report the messages if I were you

CabanSail

As stated earlier, this was split out from the Random Photo Thread as it was not the place for discussion. If left where it was then it would have ruined that thread, but to delete it smacked of censorship. So here it is.

Reading through here the debate has been quite robust but to me it seems that people have been addressing the issue at hand. Thanks to Lisatiffany and milos for their input.

If there have been PM's that were out of order then they can be reported too, just like any post here. The difference being that posts reported here go to the forum mods. Reported PM's go straight to Admin.

milos wrote: »

May I suggest to help avoid this happening again the moderators can look at a way of us marking pictures as ok to edit or not to edit.

Good idea, but we are only one forum out of hundreds on this site. Maybe the default position should be "Editing of Images with Permission only" and those who want to vary from that can state it in their Signature.