Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/11/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] GOOGLE PHOTO USE???????????????? SUE THEM?
From: philippe.amard at sfr.fr (philippe.amard)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 10:30:35 +0100
References: <CCDC3F80.26DA8%mark@rabinergroup.com> <CA+yJO1Arwgcjd70KYeX2ousDh5+9V=6BtvfU=6MftLYoVWXOJQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E32E43D-7DC5-4DD3-97BD-3D00A05C4030@frozenlight.eu> <CA+yJO1DCTGx0fRLBG=p8CwzZXXHFxHkh75Lb21zoRXHxw-krzA@mail.gmail.com> <3A03F69B49754B24A53DF487AA1CD2E1@syneticfeba505> <CA+yJO1Dvo2Kn6zu4MnNbt6kMxM2ZRej_RYB3GA_6TPbvtwfBhg@mail.gmail.com> <2A54F5FA-1249-4904-8027-00A4A52909BE@frozenlight.eu>

We on the LUG never doubted that Ted was a legend,
but since your photos are now out of your own control, doc
it must mean that you're part of History, and belong to the patrimony  
of humanity,
and that's a large family :-)
which is such an achievement when one's still alive and clicking so  
well dear Uncle Ted.

Amiti?s
Sue them all the same Philippe

Le 30 nov. 12 ? 06:58, Nathan Wajsman a ?crit :

> I really doubt that Google has the power to remove photos from other  
> web sites. It has been pointed out that most likely the kid did not  
> get the photo off a Google-owned site, but simply used Google to  
> find it which is not the same thing. The most Google can do is to  
> remove an offending site from its search results, but it has no  
> power to actually shut down a site or remove contents from it.
>
> As for copyright, it is NOT necessary to have registered the  
> copyright in order to enforce it. Copyright, as opposed to other IP  
> rights, is inherent in the act of creation and does not depend on  
> registration. This is true even in countries like the US which do  
> have a copyright registry. The only difference it makes is that it  
> makes it easier to prove that you had crated the work at a certain  
> point in time. In the case of Ted's well-known photo, the case  
> should be very clear-cut in any event.
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
>
> Nathan Wajsman
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/
>
>
> YNWA
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 30, 2012, at 3:07 AM, Tina Manley wrote:
>
>> Ted,
>>
>> You can contact Google and ask them to remove your photos from the  
>> site
>> where the kid found it.  Google is pretty good about protecting  
>> copyright
>> if you confirm that the site does not have permission to post your
>> copyright protected photo.  This has just been discussed recently  
>> on ASMP
>> websites and photographers have gotten their photos removed by  
>> Google.
>>
>> In the USA, in order to sue, you have to have registered the photo  
>> with the
>> copyright office before publication, but I'm not sure how that  
>> works in
>> Canada.
>>
>> Most of the ASMP members think that it's not worth going after casual
>> offenders and that the extra exposure offered by a Google search is  
>> worth
>> any student copying the photo as a print.  Commercial use would be an
>> entirely different matter!
>>
>> Good luck!
>>
>> Tina
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 6:18 PM, <tedgrant at shaw.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Crew,
>>> OK here's one for you, certainly any of the legal beagles out  
>>> there? :-(
>>>
>>> I was shown my photo of Prime Minister Trudeau sliding down the  
>>> staircase
>>> railing at a high school today by a student who asked me to  
>>> autograph it.
>>> "Where did you get this print?" I asked? And he responded... "oh  
>>> you can
>>> get it off GOOGLE in many sizes!"   oops and thank you very much!
>>>
>>> So Google have one of my pictures in their "Photo collection"  
>>> without
>>> permission, they charge for prints! Do not have any rights to the  
>>> photo let
>>> alone selling prints! As the Gallery representing sales of my  
>>> photography
>>> have and look after all interest in this photo as described:  "The  
>>> most
>>> ICONIC political photograph in the history of Canada."
>>>
>>> Is there a wild possibility we can sue them unless they remove the  
>>> photo
>>> off their site and certainly stop the for sale.  And at the moment  
>>> I, we?
>>> Have never been asked about it's use and where they got an  
>>> original photo?
>>>
>>> Suggestions.... GOOD, BAD OR UGLY. I thought I could sue for a  
>>> million and
>>> get a MONOCHROME! :-)
>>>
>>> thank you all for your insight and suggestions.
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>> Dr. ted.
>>>
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See 
>>> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug
>>>  
>>> >for more information
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Tina Manley, ASMP
>> www.tinamanley.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Steve McCurry (Afghan Women) Pirelli Calendar 2013:)
Message from images at comporium.net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] Steve McCurry (Afghan Women) Pirelli Calendar 2013:)
Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Steve McCurry (Afghan Women) Pirelli Calendar 2013:)
Message from images at comporium.net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] Steve McCurry (Afghan Women) Pirelli Calendar 2013:)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca) ([Leica] GOOGLE PHOTO USE???????????????? SUE THEM?)
Message from images at comporium.net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] GOOGLE PHOTO USE???????????????? SUE THEM?)
Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] GOOGLE PHOTO USE???????????????? SUE THEM?)