b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » Message 7445342 (Thread)

# Personally
I've gotten to the point where I think anyone who consents to this is actively encouraging the continuing theft of our images.
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:13, archived)
# ^ This
Tell 'em to fuck off. They're only throwing a strop because TGA, Manic, BBD'or etc. won't let them use their stuff.

Do you really want to be second choice for a shitrag like Zoo?

WELL? DO YOU?
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:19, archived)
# SCAAAABS!!!!
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:19, archived)
# SPLITTERS!!!
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:20, archived)
# *downloads lots of copywrited source pics from google*
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:20, archived)
# Fair use dude, fair use.
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:21, archived)
# not in the uk
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:22, archived)
# I don't know about that
but I've very sure about the laws that govern my usage of materials, and they fall within fair use.
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:28, archived)
# fair use is a US trade law
and copyrights have limitations and exemptions under that. There is no real legal thing called 'fair use' However placing images on the internet without establishing intellectual property rights could be deemed as releasing them into the public domain.
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:26, archived)
# Semantics.
There is a well-established and workable definition of fair use in most media in the US. Granted it is open to interpretation, but my personal use of images falls easily within the accepted definition.
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:30, archived)
# do you only use images you have permission to use in the creation of your work?
because i don't. and i'd feel a bit reluctant to stop other people using those images i've created from them.
in fact, i'd like to credit my source images when i post, only i know that probably opens me up to more trouble than it's worth
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:24, archived)
# The difference here
is we don't make money from those images so we're either just about legal or at least not worth the effort of suing.

Zoo makes money from selling the magazine. They wouldn't be allowed to just steal people's articles off the net to print, nor would they get away with raiding the flickr pages of freelance photographers to reprint, for example.

Add to that the fact that you don't have permission to use the source images you use and you might be on shaky ground then allowing someone else to use the pics for gain.
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:27, archived)
# Also
you say you'd be reluctant to stop someone doing something with a picture you'd made from other people's pictures.

Fair enough but you can't stop them. Actively telling them they can use them might sort of absolve them from any legal difficulty.

Don't actively do either one then all you have to worry about is whether you're okay making the pictures you make.
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:33, archived)
# that last bit is more the side i was worried about
i don't want to expose myself to legal risk just by letting them print it. i was hoping that a fairly informal "well, i don't object to you printing it if you like, but bear in mind that it was made with the use of other people's work that i don't own the copyright to"
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:36, archived)
# They'll read that as 'Yes'
Especially if they also want you to actively email it to them.
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:43, archived)
# no, they don't want me to email them - just email telling them it's ok to use it
and i presume (thinking about Barbarossa's comment), that just mailing the address with the subject couldn't considered consent to additional terms not mentioned in the gaz, as there can be no presumption that i would have seen & agreed to such terms (indeed, i haven't seen any)
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:49, archived)
# like I said, if you want the kudos then do it
but ensure you explain that it's created under a CC license ( and put it in your profile, linking to said license and tell them it's a one use deal for this issue.

I'd rather hope that you'd hold out though.
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:52, archived)
# no. i don't really like zoo, so it's not about kudos (& they've used ones before, anyway)
it's more about what i'd see as the right thing to do, and not wanting to be hypocritical, given my own attitude to sources
sadly, i'd like to put my work under a cc licence, but there's only about 3 of them that don't use anyone else's work, so i don't feel in a position to do so. better to leave the legal situation murky rather than be accused of licensing out other people's pictures
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 17:01, archived)
# If your work
is considered parody of the original then it can be deemed as 'transformative' and no-one can claim breach of copyright. I read it and there is legal precedence.
Mattel vs Tom Forsyth regarding food chain barbie. (cf. the 2003 9th Circuit case Mattel Inc. v. Walking Mountain Productions). ( apprently)
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 17:06, archived)
# Is the Kudos of your name in a
tits and ass mag really worth it when most of b3ta are holding out? If they can't get the source material this way they will have to continue to have a shitty page like the recent non b3ta ones or they will have to admit that they have a wealth of talent on tap here that they could encourage with compensation.

Oh and you can be sure that they are reading all this. Wednesday/Thursday is their trawl b3ta time. They have to get things to the printer by morning I would expect. It hits the shelves Sunday night.
(, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 16:31, archived)