b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 7165083 (Thread)

# That's not entirely true
Some people (like me) use their own pics to shop occasionally

Just so you know
(I helped save b3ta! mediocre ha ha ha, you're reading this, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:01, archived)
# aye
http://www.b3ta.com/board/7165079
(horrid, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:02, archived)
# I also like the fact that they call it 'Reader winner'
although the winner probably doesn't read the magazine at all
(I helped save b3ta! mediocre ha ha ha, you're reading this, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:03, archived)
# and...
are any photos I take automatically owned by me? ie can't be reproduced without my permission?
(horrid, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:06, archived)
# as far as I'm aware
if you take a photo

you own that photo
(I helped save b3ta! discomeats This canoe, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:17, archived)
# yeah thought that was the case
cheers
(horrid, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:18, archived)
# I'm not a lawyer tho, just an idiot on the net
but I'm convinced that's the case

in the uk

I get the impression in the us you can be forced to get clearance for images that you take of folks but I bet that only applies to rich and important folks, I do remember someone telling me over there they needed permission to sell a drawing they made of someone
(I helped save b3ta! discomeats This canoe, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:22, archived)
# think it's same here actually
my photos aren't that great but I did look into photo-libraries in case I start taking some good ones! Apparently if your photo is clearly 'of someone' as it were you're supposed to get a release form signed by them.

I don't know if this is just to cover the library's back, but it does make me wonder - what about news photos and generally unflattering photos of people you see every day? Because if I could I'd quite fancy going and taking photos the subjects won't like :-)
(horrid, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:29, archived)
# I think
(at the risk of sounding like a scratched bastard :D)

that it requires looking at the approprite law and getting a complete understanding of exactly what's what
(I helped save b3ta! discomeats This canoe, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:35, archived)
# alright clever-arse
but what's the point in doing research yourself when you can get people on web forums to look it up for you? ;-)
(horrid, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:46, archived)
# like an army of slaves?
crawling all over the internet

bringing you news and information, all the time, building up your power

till you find your moment, and become a throbbing king of the world!

and all tremble at your feets!
(I helped save b3ta! discomeats This canoe, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:51, archived)
# was throbbing the right word there?
and yeah, I could do that, but I'll probably forget and fall asleep
(horrid, Tue 8 May 2007, 12:07, archived)
# yes
the grreater the vigour of throb the better
(I helped save b3ta! discomeats This canoe, Tue 8 May 2007, 12:18, archived)
# depends
if you took it during work time
then your firm owns it
(I helped save b3ta! The King of Hats Cone of shame, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:22, archived)
# the "legally defined party that took the photograph owns it"
how about that?
(I helped save b3ta! discomeats This canoe, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:26, archived)
# work owns everything you do in work time
*hides sketch book, archives and deletes B3ta folder from hard drive*
(I helped save b3ta! The King of Hats Cone of shame, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:30, archived)
# unless you have some arrangement to the contrary
of course if you have one of those crap contracts where "everything" you create while you are an employee (and not just on work hours) belongs to the employer that's a different kettle of shit

and yes, some folk sign such unreasonable shit :D
(I helped save b3ta! discomeats This canoe, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:38, archived)
# some of those "reader" names are a tad suspicious....
HELLO FRED!!
and Danni T!!


oh, they don't really exist? .....ahhh!
(I helped save b3ta! The King of Hats Cone of shame, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:08, archived)
# maybe they should be taken to task on that
gmtv were caught out weren't they
(horrid, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:14, archived)
# And if they use those
That's a direct copyright infringement. Can you Gaz me with any examples they have used?
(I helped save b3ta! riverghost servicing your mum since, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:04, archived)
# also
if you change/shop an image by 25% (i think)
then it is no longer held by it's original copyright

although it's got to be tricky figuring what exactly is 25%
i think it was brought in to stop peeps suing each other
over images/logos etc that coincidentally look a little alike
(I helped save b3ta! The King of Hats Cone of shame, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:05, archived)
# I believe the law states
that it can't be distinguishable from the original.
(I helped save b3ta! riverghost servicing your mum since, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:07, archived)
# In terms of music, it's more about whether or not the song would still be a song without the sample.
If that helps at all.

For example, "Ice Ice Baby" would not still be a song if it didn't have that sample from "Under Pressure".
(I helped save b3ta! gronkpan @vomitinglarry.bsky.social, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:27, archived)
# that sounds very hard
maybe we need a lawyer chappy, or chappess to explain it all

or maybe a "munters guide to the legalities of images" as it's own faq?
(I helped save b3ta! discomeats This canoe, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:19, archived)
# yeah, sorry
i only deal with copyright in relation to printed words
i'm a little hazey on the image side of things
(I helped save b3ta! The King of Hats Cone of shame, Tue 8 May 2007, 11:24, archived)