bigphilnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4073 posts, RR: 56 Posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2425 times:
This is an article I wrote about copyright infringement in our hobby. For all of my photos uploaded here, I always refused to add watermarks because I wanted people to be able to use my shots at desktop wallpapers and I didn't want to alter my shots out of fear of theft.
With that, however, I went after those thieves hard whenever possible. And I hope we all do, and look out for each other in the process...
soon7x7 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 2796 posts, RR: 14 Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2330 times:
How Ironic..."Flight Display Systems" which posts banner ads here on A/Net and yes Phil, on NYC site, is using 9 unauthorized images of the interior of a G-lll I shot for a client. Some of these images were also used the night a certain celeb flew back a certain female vocalists body recently to the east coast from California. My images appeared that night on 7 sites with photo credits given to "Gizmodo.com". After photo documenting this particular G-lll, I have never released any of the images to anyone other than my client. I'm particularly concerned how the original shots made it into the hands of whomever Gizmodo is. While I do adhere to a basic philosophy, "If you don't want it stolen, don't put it on the internet", but how does one steal images I never posted to begin with?...You see, their exists no way to control it...only to pursue it. So I have...g
bigphilnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4073 posts, RR: 56 Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2161 times:
soon7x7, gizmodo is a sizable tech website. You should pursue them and I expect that they will actually do the right thing by you. If you can screenshot me the ad if you see it on my site, I will see what I can do to prevent its appearance.
I think it's so very important and people just don't want to face it because they accept it as something that just comes along with being a planespotter. But if we all stand up to this stuff, and even recruit our friends for help when these cases happen, people and companies will know to think twice.
I'd rather skip using watermarks and lay a beating on those who steal my stuff. Just because I leave my doors unlocked doesn't mean you have a right to enter my home....and I will be waiting....shotgun in hand. (I'm a typical American, huh? haha)
soon7x7 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 2796 posts, RR: 14 Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2113 times:
Quoting bigphilnyc (Reply 4): I'd rather skip using watermarks and lay a beating on those who steal my stuff
I'm with you on that!...You go out and create a beautiful photo only to rubber stamp it w/ a water mark. (Extremely distractive and unappealing). While most of my work gets rejected here on A/net, due to Post Shoot PS skills (or lack of them), If I can remove a watermark...anyone can.
I did locate the origin of the image leak if you will...this one's going to be sticky! The images are easy to find..."Flight Display Systems" ad...I'm looking at one now on this very page. Go into their site and click , G-lll. My fear is that another enterprise in the future will lift them from the site and this will cause a lot of grief. The owner of this aircraft is a high profile individual that likes his privacy as most do. If this situation gets dirty, it will of course come down on me as I am the originator of the images. The fact remains very little if any of my corporate aviation work ever gets out on Aviation Photography Websites for a reason. This particular case would appear a cut and dry infringement case worth a lot of $$$ however all is not that simple. Just shows how unjustified use of a persons images can cause so much trouble. Seems it will be resolved this upcoming week but guess images will remain on the site for now...I will however be sure to satisfy my end here as well, of course. When "Shooting for Hire", it is so important to lay out your terms to the client up front in black and white, otherwise your work is fair game. This I have done in the past and has aided in the recovery of much revenue from lifted images. This particular case has me torqued out and I intend to see it through...g
unattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2240 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2028 times:
Quoting bigphilnyc (Reply 4): I'd rather skip using watermarks and lay a beating on those who steal my stuff. Just because I leave my doors unlocked doesn't mean you have a right to enter my home....and I will be waiting....shotgun in hand. (I'm a typical American, huh? haha)
Great atricle! Unfortunately, the ones that need to read this will probably never see it.
I, however, believe a watermark can go a long way. It's easy to remove a copyright bar from the bottom of the image. It's more difficult to remove a watermark from the center of the image. It is nice that this website allows members to vary the intensity of the watermark, almost making it invisible to the nakad eye. One thing I DO NOT agree with is the removal of the watermark for First Class members. But, I upload here knowing the risks and rewards and will continue to do so.