Tube enthusiasts crack down on flickr copy & paste

Can you mention which flickr user is doing this, as I would like to check that my own photos on flickr haven't been stolen as well.

Unless you have the permission of the copyright owner this isn't quite true:

Copying songs, films or images from the internet without permission is illegal under Britain's copyright laws, which would be draconian were it not for the fact that they are so frequently flouted and with so little comeback. The principle, though, is straightforward: unless a copyright owner has given permission for content to be shared – whether via YouTube or the photo-sharing site Flickr – copying, even for private use, is illegal.

SOURCE : The Guardian

You may notice my Avatar which is from Learn to Speak Cat, which appears in the Metro paper daily. I approached Anthony Smith and obtained written permission first. It didn't matter whether I posted the material on the internet or copy/pasted onto my personal PC... without permission I would have broken copyright legislation. Anthony kindly also sent me the original high-res version which I wouldn't have if I had kept quiet thinking I could have got away with using the cartoon without permission... so yes it sometimes is to your advantage to ask first.

Its another question however if the owner would ever know or would take action if you did pinch their work, however it still doesn't justify doing it without permission. IMO it says a lot about a person if they don't ask first.

I have had a YouTube video taken down once which contained stills of images I had captured and had been posted on Fotopic (now long gone)... another forum member had approached the poster who had pinched their images and used them in the same video. The poster replied to them telling them to **** off (literally) claiming it was legal because the images were online and therefore freely available for them to use as they wanted.... such naivety/stupidity. The video was duly removed !!!

If you don't want your photos copied don't post them in a public arena! As for Watermarks they can be Photoshopped out

In reality what is a photos value and why do people share their photos?

This issue comes up time and time again and I am afraid the horse has bolted as we can all copy a photo now by one click.

Remember it is easy to scan photos prom books too so how do you stop that ?

I post a lot if photos on line and I am happy to share them and if someone does use one they are not going to be making shed loads of money but they are showing my photos to more people.

So I posted a photo for all to see, someone copies it and this lets more people view it and the problem is ?

XF

How incredibly naïve.

The problem is that somewhere along that line, somebody will seek to achieve recognition for that image that is not deserved, or worse, make money out if it. How would you feel if an image or work you know you created somehow ended up in a magazine or somewhere with no credit to yourself but to some other individual? Regardless of the actual monetary value one could hope to achieve through this copying and pasting action, I lose count now of how many times various people I know who have been on Flickr, Fotopic, &c. have gone on eBay or wherever to seek DVDs or CDs they think contain original collections of images from the seller, only to find many of their own pictures on said media! And these are from people who are supposedly enthusiasts and thus you would expect to have a mutual respect for others and the fact somebody has taken the time to share an image.

Plain rude and disrespectful. Not to mention the fact that when it comes to a case of legislation needing to be enforced in this digital age, the blasé attitude people seem to have with the basics of Copyright makes it difficult for legislation to come to the aid of somebody who wants or needs to enforce their right to protect something.

That complete lack of respect is partly why I don't really "share" much these days with other enthusiasts or "communities" because you can guarantee there is always going to be somebody there who will want to take take take for their own benefit.

Well there you go then! It's provided they are asked. There are occasions where people have not been asked or where the images appear with somebody else's name under it! That's not just speaking for myself – Squarewheels himself had a bout of it on Flickr recently, and I'm sure we all respect him for his valuable website enough not to rip him off, surely? Especially as he has been kind enough and willing enough to share with us. Or have I got some of you wrong here? He wasn't so much outraged (as I was when he told me!), but more upset, that given all the time and effort he puts into his site, somebody would seek to simply copy his images into a Flickr account and not even put so much as a comment referring to him alongside any of the images. Not that it makes it alright if you do, given the front page of his site explicitly states that Copyright exists on all the work on his site.

Not to mention again the fact there is a small minority of people out there making money out of work they did not create (not so many now, but they are still around). Any self-respecting person out there who cares half a bean about what they produce would go to reasonable lengths to protect that, and simply ask what they are entitled to – the appropriate credit – and not be poo pood on by those who seek to use the images or wish to view them or share onwards when the author politely requests that credit or politely requests that they take the image down.

I have no qualms that upload their images and would like for them to go far and wide. I have qualms with people who seem to have a problem when an individual wishes for somebody to simply adhere to polite requests that are reasonable and to expected, alongside legislation.

If you're happy for people to copy it, no problem at all. Copyright is, as the name suggests, the right of an author, artist, etc to restrict copying of the material he creates (by banning copying altogether, permitting it for a fee. or whatever) He can, of course, choose not to exercise that right - in other words allow anyone to make free with his photos, words or whatever. But that is his choice: it is not for someone else, whether naively, recklessly or maliciously, simply to presume that such copying is allowed.

Of course many people do copy a work without first seeking permission - but they run the risk that the copyright owner might find out and object. (Maybe on the principle that it's easier to seek forgiveness than permission?)

Removing the offending material is quick and easy on the Internet, and usually sufficient to satisfy the copyright owner. It's a different matter if the copyist has invested any money in the copying (e.g by printing a book) and even more so if the copyright owner has lost money as a result (e.g through lost sales of his own book). Then serious money can be involved

Is it easy to add a watermark?
Also it easy for a watermark to be removed?