# Copyright



## Damo516 (Nov 9, 2015)

Do we need it for our photos?

Occasionally there is a pic or 2 on here with it? @martinzx for one...

Has there been any photos stolen and used without permission?


----------



## gimli (Mar 24, 2016)

I don't care about any of that stuff. I'm not a professional photographer and most of my shots aren't professional so by all means I won't care if they end up being used by others... :notworthy:


----------



## Filterlab (Nov 13, 2008)

I'd quite like to see a random, third party use any photos I've posted.


----------



## martinzx (Aug 29, 2010)

Hi Damo,

I use to use a watermark for my website photos :thumbsup: , but now I use a plugin that stops people copying my images. I did see one of my images on a for sale ad once, but it was a low value USSR watch...


----------



## BondandBigM (Apr 4, 2007)

I've had pics pinched from here of both me and my watches and used on a fake Facebook page. They even put my mobile phone number on it.

I tried to have the page closed but you just run up against a brick wall and as far as I could see there is no phone number to actually call them all you seem to be able to do is report the page.

I'm not sure it would make any difference if the pics had some kind of watermark or not.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

I did put a copyright notice on some of my pics when I noticed that Google was pilfering some of them from my Photobucket account (are Google and Photobucket affiliated?) and showing them in their image pages. After researching, I found that anyone can use the copyright sign, as you have automatic copyright of anything you produce, whether that's a picture, a piece of art or some written prose/thesis, and the copyright notice is there to warn others that you are aware of this, and so should they be. You would need to register with the copyright office, however, if you actually wanted to persue a claim against someone. As I don't use Photobucket anymore, it's not a problem, so I don't do it now. Theoretically, you were supposed to ask permission or at least give a credit to the original producer of a piece before using it, but with the advent of the 'computer age' it's very easy these days to just copy/paste any random picture that you find on the net. In fact the only person I see doing this on here is Honor (@Always"watching") who always puts a picture credit on his posted pics. :thumbsup:

Here's a couple of my old pics with the notice photoshopped on in the correct format....Someone with the right skills could easily remove these, but I used to try and place them so that cropping would obliterate part of the pic. Perhaps some of our pro photographers could enlighten a bit more....?


----------



## mel (Dec 6, 2006)

Copyrights are a minefield, as Rog says, it automatically exists if you produce something yourself - but pursuing someone for breaching copyright would "costalot" and some more - - Nigel's willing to work for £350 an hour - - so why bother?

You can also include the words "All Rights Reserved" which may put some folks off using your photos without your permission, but then again, you have to know they've done it in the first place :tumbleweed:


----------



## Damo516 (Nov 9, 2015)

Roger, received loud and clear.

I was only asking as it seems some do some don't.

There are a few at work that do landscape photography/car rebuilds etc that take a lot of photos and they insist on some copyright/watermark etc. I was asked about wether I do for my watches, to which I said no, then I got a someone could steal/use it for their own personal use.

I've never bothered about it before but thought I'd ask anyway...

Thanks all


----------



## vinn (Jun 14, 2015)

google IS affiliated with the bucket - and more! that is why I went to the "gallery". I looked into copy right, too much trouble. vin


----------



## William_Wilson (May 21, 2007)

As stated copyright is automatic. The absence of copyright notice does not imply that an image rests in the public domain.

I would think keeping a copy of the original unedited image would go a long way toward establishing ownership. I, at the very least, resize my images for both convenience of posting, and as a means of demonstrating ownership. Though, I doubt anything I produce would be of value to others. :wink:

Later,
William


----------



## Chromejob (Jul 28, 2006)

I used to put watermarks on my pics that I edited in PHotoshop, still have the macro and the source files. (I got good at it. It's made of two different semi-opaque images with accompanying masks, so that it shows up against light and dark backgrounds. Muahaha. Photoshop rocks for stuff like that.) In the last few years I've put q&d pics on Imgur instead, but I still edit fancy ones from time to time, and those do include watermarks. Thanks to Photoshop automation, I can download a whole bushel of pics and apply the watermark semi-automatically to all.

Is it necessary? Who knows. Some of my posed pics have a lot of work in them, so having a version featuring a watermark would grease the skids in making a copyright violation claim. But I don't have detectives running loose trying to find people stealing my content...

At one time I had a web column (before blogs got big), and I found one or two sites had stolen my content and put it on their site as their own. Making a complaint to their hosting firm was a PITA, and in most cases it was ineffectual.  That's the digital world we live in now. No one respects original authors, no one holds back from aberrant behavior. I sometimes err, but I find people being douche-rockets to strangers on a daily basis, and it's par for the course. Very sad state indeed.


----------

