MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: w7lwi on April 08, 2016, 11:06
-
This article illustrates the complexity of copyright laws both in Europe and elsewhere. Easy to see why some agencies are skittish. Still, it seems to me that the onus should be on the end user, not the intermediate photographer.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/legal-battle-brewing-over-post-131922151.html
-
All these attempts to re-define the word "public" are ultimately going to fail.
The bureaucrats behind this nonsense will be beaten back by unending criticism, resistance and disobedience. We can all play a part in harassing them, by waving our cameras around in plain view while taking photos; and if we're hassled, acting outraged and incredulous.
Eventually, legal action will end this. I'd like to see, for example, a class action suit on behalf of severely disabled people who can't go to these 'public' places, and can only see them via photos and web sites.
-
I just this week had some editorial pics deactivated at iS as they featured bridges by a particular architect. Others have had pics of others of his architectural work deactivated. It seems odd that he can demand that practical works, like bridges, can't even be sold editorially, in countries which allow photographs shot of and in public spaces to be sold editorially.
I guess no agency - or photographer - particularly wants to have to fight this in court.
-
The usual it's a money grab. BUS gets a percentage.
-
2d images of 3d objects should never fall under copyright, youre image cant violate the rights because it isnt a copy