• Help Support Hardline Crawlers :

This really belongs in chitchat but...

Speeding

Forum member #1
Hardline Crawler
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
4,575
Location
murfreesboro, tn
I'd like a private rant, thank you.

I guess if you're not a photographer you have a hard time understanding. Photos are property. My photos belong to me. Especially when I put my name on them! I will put my name on them to "share" online, but I still own the photo. If you remove my name from the photo and reuse it you are essentially stealing!

C.A.O.S.'s new gallery:
http://picasaweb.google.com/caos4x4/CAOSPhotoHistory

Half of those pics are mine!

>:(
 
John Galbreath Jr. said:
You were a photog for the club. Were they taken then? Or after you severed that relationship?

Most were taken after, at the 'ulimate adventure' when I showed up for one day. When I uploaded a photoalbum to CAOS for CAOS I don't care what they do with the photos... but if it has a tag on it I expect them to respect that and at least contact me. The UCA photos were just some I posted in a thread. I really need to find out my exact rights I suppose.
 
Well I will be attending the CAOS officer's meeting this evening to discuss this issue. Even though they tried to talk me out of it. I did my homework with the help of Brandon Foster and Matt Callies (CRAWL photogs) so I hope I'll be able to get them to understand without an issue.
 
What do you want. Compensation if used or removal of pics. Should be easy for them. Or compenstation as they have already used them, may be harder.
 
Looks like we need a fuk you smilie:

smilie.jpg
 
John Galbreath Jr. said:
What do you want. Compensation if used or removal of pics. Should be easy for them. Or compenstation as they have already used them, may be harder.

All I want is my tag to be left on my photos. If they don't want to do that... they can purchase the photos. Or, I can take them to court... I've done a bunch of research. LOL I doubt they'll argue with me at all once they see me in person.
 
Scott siad: "some photos that were cropped for content and fit."

Offer to take the size used and put your logo back on it for them.
 
I have had so many run in's with that dickhole, he is a grade A prick. Typical CAOS, a non-member, non-officer attends the Officer's meeting. What an assclown.
 
John Galbreath Jr. said:
Scott siad: "some photos that were cropped for content and fit."

Offer to take the size used and put your logo back on it for them.

I did actually, at the meeting tonight. Scott said "No no no... I'm just going to delete them" ::) He got mad. So'd Buggymike and DaddyBill. I was even asked to leave the meeting - in a tactful way though. I don't know if he posted that I went, but I called Jonica and Brent and asked if I could attend since I was directly involved even though I'm no an officer. Had to talk them into it though.
 
Oh, and I wish you guys could see what the guys at CRAWL think about this situation. :eek: Appearently this similar thing has happened to all of them and they're very passionate about it.
 
I got there after you had left, sorry. Some people in the room "got it" and some
didn't. I did hear several compliments about the way you handled yourself.
From what I understand you were very professional and I hope you don't mind
me saying adult in what had to be an awkward situation. I'm sure it felt like you
against a crowd, but good job and again sorry I missed you.
 
Thank you Dollar.


In case the post gets removed, here is what I posted on CAOS after Jro's ignorant post.

Oookay, I tried to handle this issue without getting into an e-argument but I have a few things to say so the people who don't understand photography, will. I'm tired of my name being dragged through the mud after a single sentence asking to "please either remove or replace with original photos".

Few things to know... I own my photos. Period. For any reason I can ask to have any photo removed from any site at any time, and they have no choice but to do so... because I own them. I could explain further, but I don't feel I need to. I enjoy sharing my photos with CAOS and those who view this site, all I ask is my photo do not be edited in any way. If it is necessary to edit, please contact me first and we'll work it out.

As for compensation, as I understood it the camera was a gift. A Thank You for doing what I did for the years before, and as a "we would like you to continue to do so" type thing. I feel I've done that. Those who disagree please let me know. As for CAOS getting me into events for free... I don't really see that, so.

I work for CRAWL Magazine, they pay me for my photos that they use. That's a completely different situation and it's not even comparable.

There, now you guys kind of know my side of the story. I really hate to post up but I couldn't take it any longer.
 
Also in case any of you are interested...

http://www.copyright.gov/

F.A.Q.

My local copying store will not make reproductions of old family photographs. What can I do?
Photocopying shops, photography stores and other photo developing stores are often reluctant to make reproductions of old photographs for fear of violating the copyright law and being sued. These fears are not unreasonable, because copy shops have been sued for reproducing copyrighted works and have been required to pay substantial damages for infringing copyrighted works. The policy established by a shop is a business decision and risk assessment that the business is entitled to make, because the business may face liability if they reproduce a work even if they did not know the work was copyrighted.
In the case of photographs, it is sometimes difficult to determine who owns the copyright and there may be little or no information about the owner on individual copies. Ownership of a "copy" of a photograph – the tangible embodiment of the "work" – is distinct from the "work" itself – the intangible intellectual property. The owner of the "work" is generally the photographer or, in certain situations, the employer of the photographer. Even if a person hires a photographer to take pictures of a wedding, for example, the photographer will own the copyright in the photographs unless the copyright in the photographs is transferred, in writing and signed by the copyright owner, to another person. The subject of the photograph generally has nothing to do with the ownership of the copyright in the photograph. If the photographer is no longer living, the rights in the photograph are determined by the photographer's will or passed as personal property by the applicable laws of intestate succession.

As stated in the 1976 Copyright Act, a copyright comes into existence automatically the moment a photograph is created. By this law, that copyright belongs to the photographer or the photographers studio--NOT the person who owns the photograph.
A copyright infringement is the copying of any image without the written permission of the copyright owner. Congress has made it clear that copyright infringements are very serious infractions. In addition to providing criminal penalties for willful commercial infringement, the Copyright Act of 1976 also authorizes private lawsuits to recover damages, legal fees and injunctions. And the Act permits the Court to award up to $100,000.00 per infringement in statutory damages without proof of actual damage
 
Scott Wilson and now Jason Rose. Man I remember Ricky B talking about how Rose was a good guy and all this **** about a year ago. Glad you finally got the memo. :flipoff1: The funny part is he only gets in there when the dogs call him and tell him to. He is such a joke, he has brought Wanker's build thread back to life on PBB, guess he conned the new owner of that jeep to let him "build" it for him. By build I mean have it sit in his driveway for a year and talk about how badass it is going to be.

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=553746
 

Latest posts

Back
Top