Someone using my website pictures

[desertdarlene]

Quote:
That's correct, if you are taking photos of a copyrighted subject (such as a piece of art, certain landmarks, etc), you are still held by copyright laws regarding the subject of the photo. I know a lot of artists get into trouble by painting pictures or photographing the Hollywood sign or that one lone Monterrey pine up in the north of California. There are ways to work around it, but it's tricky and sometimes it takes a judge to figure out if it's a violation or not.

I don't know why anyone can't take photos of the trains, but I do know that you can be arrested for being near the tracks or on "railroad property" without authorization. I've gotten photos of trains and trolleys and never had an issue.

Thanks Swheat, for clearing that up for me about the photo!

 

[Steve_of_sandspoultry]

Quote:
I like how he tries to make you out to be the bad guy. What a jerk.

I liked that to, Pinetown is about 20 minutes from here and since this is a rural area it won't be to hard to find the person, I already put the "feelers" out. The person is not responding to any of their adds on CL. Gee I wonder why and as of now they haven't put up a new add with pics. I am very much looking forward to getting this person on the phone or showing up at their door. Sharon and I were just talking and have it narrowed down to just a couple of people that bought SS chicks from us in the spring. I am patient and sooner or later they will surface. And by the way only got a "canned" message back from CL to this point and the local sheriffs dept was pretty much if you really want to pursue this they would have to take the report. They said pretty much what I figured, it was more like just take care of it yourself they are just down the street.

Steve

 

[PineappleMama]

It's been removed.

One good thing about the ones that include a phone number, or farm name, or whatever is that in the future you can search the site using that number or keyword and bring up any ad that has it... so you can see if they're still doing what they aren't poda be doing.

Course it helps a lot if you make sure they know why it is that their ad was flagged... otherwise it may take a LONG time for the light to dawn...

 

[Carols Clucks]

Quote:
That's correct, if you are taking photos of a copyrighted subject (such as a piece of art, certain landmarks, etc), you are still held by copyright laws regarding the subject of the photo. I know a lot of artists get into trouble by painting pictures or photographing the Hollywood sign or that one lone Monterrey pine up in the north of California. There are ways to work around it, but it's tricky and sometimes it takes a judge to figure out if it's a violation or not.

I don't know why anyone can't take photos of the trains, but I do know that you can be arrested for being near the tracks or on "railroad property" without authorization. I've gotten photos of trains and trolleys and never had an issue.

Thanks Swheat, for clearing that up for me about the photo!

Just an FYI, certain things like the pine in Carmel are protected. In the case of the pine, you have to pay an entry fee to take 17 mile drive just to photograph it. Because they went to court and made it know that is their trademark, you can not use that pine in your photos with out paying a royalty or getting permission.

In the case of the train, if your friend used a long lens and could take the photo from a public street they would have been okay, chances are the guy who tagged the train just wanted a donation. Unless they owned the train and it was parked on their private property and to see it you had to trespass, they likely would have been out of luck in court and received a bill from the company that owned the train (if they did not get tickets for vandalism and trespassing as well)

 

[CrazyChickieMama]

In the case of the Lone Pine, you can take pics and post them, just not earn money from posting of the picture. I lived there and took a ton of pics of it and never got in trouble for posting it. But you cannot sell prints or use it in any other way to earn money. One advantage of knowing someone who lived in Pebble Beach is not ever having to pay to take the 17 Mile Drive

lol

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

Quote:
One does NOT have to pay to have a copyright. The copyright exists from the time the work is created. One can pay a SMALL amount of money to REGISTER the copyright, and most PUBLISHED works require registration, and that provides ADDITIONAL compensation for infringement, and serves as proof of copyright ownership. However, compensation for losses due to copyright infringement does not require registration.

I did not go back and look through the current law, but it USED to be, and I highly suspect still is, that all monies earned will be compensated whether the work is registered or not. If registered, you can also be reimbursed for the costs to recover those losses as well as additional penalties from the person or entity who infringed.

 

[Carols Clucks]

you have to pay to have the copyright office register it......................

you have to have a registered copyright to sue for damages (money)

with out the registered copyright you can not be awarded damages (unless you get a very friendly judge)