Copyright in photography means that you own an image you created. The law says you created that image as soon as the shutter is released . The photographer who pushed the button owns the copyright. A photographer will own that copyright throughout their life and 70 years afterwards.
That maybe true. I take photographs for my enjoyment and for the enjoyment of others. If others copy them so be it. I have also take photographs relating to the work I did (industrial electrical, is another matter.
So what happens if a photograph is edited to alter it in some way who then has the copywite. Is it the edited version who has the copywite ? Or the original photographers? This is a grey area to say the least.
Iit is really up to the original photographer to protect his property rights. in this instance there is the choice of not posting on the internet or making it so low grade it before posting that it can’t be reproduced. Putting a signature on the photo can easily be removed a watermark is a lot harder. the latter is always the better option to protect any photo.
This came up on the previous site I seem to remember and caused quite a bit of comment.
Oh for the record if anyone want to use my photos I post for themselves only then they a most welcome to. In the past members have drawn copies of my photos and I am honoured that they are considered good enough
This is all very well but have you read the fine print on the site on which these photos are posted? Speaking very generally at a minimum most of them say that by posting the photos there you give the site the right to use them anywhere.
For example Imgur Terms of Service:
With regard to any file or content you upload to the public portions of our site, you grant Imgur a non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable worldwide license (with sublicense and assignment rights) to use, to display online and in any present or future media, to create derivative works of, to allow downloads of, and/or distribute any such file or content.
As copyright rules vary in different part of the world Australia is different to the UK and USA for example.
Personally I don’t care that much but there you go.
True possibly, but one could argue that if the original had other things added to the picture say another person, (which is easily done) then it was a “new work of art” so to speak. there are even cases where a photo has been “lifted” and then sold on to say a company for advertising… That company buys in good faith and actually owes the original photographer nothing as it was not a direct purchase but via a third person.
It gets very complicated
This or very similar happened to Dawn my manageress. Someone saw one of her photos and did a line drawing of it and sold the line drawing on to a magazine. It got messy to say the least ,I don’t think the outcome was ever resolved or not that i am aware of due to costs involved
Well, if anyone wants to use or steals my pics, how would I know & if I did know I think I’d be flattered that they thought them good enough to steal/use. Doubt it’ll ever happen though.
I have asked permission to use others photo’s, not for gain, for my own use & all have said yes, I could.
I like digital because because if the shot is total crap you can delete it, which you couldn’t with the old system. There’s no having to wait for photo’s to be developed either any more. They are instantly on the PC. My little camera also has a super optical zoom & it takes really good pics of sunrises/sunsets.