He is using a legal loophole in the law as PJ pointed out and he evidently has the money and lawyers to back it or otherwise why were his ports pulled and then reinstated?

His lawyers took over and made everyone come to their knees.

In the United States, the Copyright Act defines "derivative work" in 17 U.S.C. � 101:

A �derivative work� is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a �derivative work�.

Several other sections of the Copyright Act are relevant, also. 17 U.S.C. � 102(a) provides:

Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

17 U.S.C. � 103(b) provides:

The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material.

17 U.S.C. � 106 provides:

Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following: (1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies...; (2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work; (3) to distribute copies...of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending....

US Copyright Office Circular 14: Derivative Works notes that:

A typical example of a derivative work received for registration in the Copyright Office is one that is primarily a new work but incorporates some previously published material. This previously published material makes the work a derivative work under the copyright law. To be copyrightable, a derivative work must be different enough from the original to be regarded as a "new work" or must contain a substantial amount of new material. Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a preexisting work will not qualify the work as a new version for copyright purposes. The new material must be original and copyrightable in itself. Titles, short phrases, and format, for example, are not copyrightable.

The statutory definition is incomplete and the concept of derivative work must be understood with reference to explanatory case law. Three major copyright law issues arise concerning derivative works: (1) what acts are sufficient to cause a copyright-protected derivative work to come into existence; (2) what acts constitute copyright infringement of a copyright in a copyright-protected work; and (3) in what circumstances is a person otherwise liable for infringement of copyright in a copyright-protected derivative work excused from liability by an affirmative defense, such as first sale or fair use?

There is now a thread on SS about it!

And a few are claiming he is using their work so lets see what comes of this.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=127563

Happened this past summer and everyone went nuts except that Anthony told me it was correct and not broken and now there are two threads about it running on SS.

Here is the link, also this link links to the other two threads about the same thing!

There is nothing wrong people get used to it because it appears it will be a reoccurring thing.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=127553

It just carried over to here and now someones cornflakes have been pissed in

Well let's see.

Since Railroads are private property then the Buildings also must be private property and even though you can shoot something on private property from public property the issue arises when you go to sell the image you have therefore you would need a "Property Release".

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on January 07, 2013, 16:35

As I quietly stick my foot in the door

For those who live in the States!

http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/cross_chp9.pdf  RR Track laws for all 50 states

Seriously, you have some OCD or something about rules, regulations and laws. Whats track laws got to do with architectural turrets on trains stations?

Had a $120 sale last week,

Just sold an SOD I guess but was not expecting $120:

Of course they are!

Because anything that is approved will be your port images unlike Istock and some others.

Hi,

Model Releases:
Would like to check whether model releases are really required for the application process as well? For istock, they don't care during the application stage when they are just checking your photo quality.

Property Releases
Similarly, what about property releases? Are they needed during application stage?

Thanks.

That still doesn't mean that the images will get accepted!

My dear guys, at first, churches in Europe are mostly not private and NOT run from donations. In my homecountry most of church income goes from taxes we ALL pay, in church or not. Also most of churches were built before 18th century and maybe you americans have it different but ALL people had to work for free for church and they had to pay taxes to church in those times. Compulsory free work and church taxes are not donations in my opinion. So if we start talking about "ethical", we should start from the beginning

So YES, most European churches were built from taxes and many are still run from taxes, despite excuses like donations which often make just small part of the whole budget.

Piss on the packers!

Maybe this will help. (go Packers)

http://www.shutterstock.com/buzz/shutterstock-property-release-policy

Quote from: ShadySue on January 05, 2013, 20:38

Quote from: Batman on January 05, 2013, 20:29

SS will refuse pictures because they are not newsworthy doesn't matter if they are public private church or state. Somebody answer this do these sell much. If not whats the point.

If SS won't take them, how can we know whether they'd sell there if allowed?
The question is a point of permissions.

Do they sell on places that do take them.

Doesn't matter because SS is based in the USA and in the USA all churches are privately owned therefore they require a PR.

Yo bud +1

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on January 04, 2013, 08:06

Just got notice this morning.

Quote

NOTICE OF PENDING CLASS ACTION AND NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
ANGEL FRALEY V. FACEBOOK, INC.

Me too, now that should make them think about using us for advertising, without permission.

If you read down a little, the Max. any person can get is $10. I'm not sure it's worth filling out the forms.

Class actions, where the companies pay millions and the attorneys are the only ones who profit.

Newbies have to get their port and reputation built.

It can take you a good year depending.

To get good reliable sales you will need a good solid port and at least 1500 images to help stand out among the near 25 million out there.

This is a marathon.

And do as others say take a break.

Right now I am in winter and dont usually do much shooting except every once in a while.

I spend time looking at what is and isn't out here so I have ideas for later when the weather breaks.

My advice is to make sure that your title, description, keywords and copyright are in the JPEG you upload. Keep track of it however else you like, but you want the metadata in the image. The images will outlast any one piece of software that is currently in use and when you want to upload the images somewhere new, you'll have all the data right there ready to go.

+1 agree with this.

It can been done in Windows or in Photoshop.