homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.204.90.135
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Code, Content, and Presentation / Site Graphics and Multimedia Design
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: not2easy

Site Graphics and Multimedia Design Forum

    
Scanning Pics from Magazines and Using it in Website.
Is this a violation of copyright law?
beautykat




msg:848593
 5:41 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

We are selling beauty care products through our website. One of the suggestions is to put faces of models in our website. The easier way to accomplish this is the scan pictures from magazines and obviously, the hard and expensive way is to hire a model and photographer. Or, another way is to download it from some other websites.

Say we scan a picture from a magazine or download it and then modify it by placing it together with our products. Will we run into any infringement issues with this? Do we have to say, "reference from ...."? Anyone has experience with this?

 

willybfriendly




msg:848594
 5:46 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

It is a violation.

But, you probably would not have asked if you did not already know this.

WBF

PatrickDeese




msg:848595
 5:53 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

Using other peoples photos without express written consent is a violation of copyright - changing it do not diminish their rights - as copyright includes extends to derivative works.

Jon_King




msg:848596
 5:54 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

While a technical violation, if you are selling a particular companies' products and using their images, they probably won't say a thing; even scanned from a magazine. They are required by law to inform you of their disapproval (prior to legal action), so they will let you know. In other words, no meaningful legal action can really take place unless the company has informed you that you are in violation of the use of their image.

Another safer way to go is stock photos, which I recommend. Generic beauty product shots should be easy to find and not expensive.

lZakl




msg:848597
 6:17 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

Cheaper, faster, and MORE LEGAL than that you are planning, is to get an account with someone like metrocreativegraphics. There you can find royalty-free high resolution images and graphics in almost every category. And yes, they do have face models, hand models, fashion, etc. Their contract states simply that the images available through their website are for commercial use as long as you had a valid account with Metro at the time you downloaded the image. I use probably four or five sites like this in addition to our photographers. It allows me to have advertising that “stands-out” :0)

Never Never NEVER use content without:

1) Making sure it is royalty-free or

2) Getting a general “Signature of Release” ((Jon_King, even if you are selling their product, they may not OWN the image, it may be a royaly item, therefor they cannot release the permission of it's use.))or

3) Paying for the image, and get a contract stating such image is yours for commercial use or

4) Go with generic images created and owned by you. You own a camera right?

Point being: Scanning out of a magazine, while it might seem benign, is worse than stealing a CD from Wal-Mart. The reason? If you stole a CD from Wal-Mart, and your friend just so happened to overhear that CD playing, while they MAY be aware that it could possibly be stolen, they won’t question the fact that the music ON the CD isn’t written by you. When someone goes to your website, the general conception to the public is that you own/created the graphics on that site.

Think before doing... common sense will go a long way.

-- Zak

Jon_King




msg:848598
 6:29 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

Man, I don't know about that Zak. Have you browsed the web lately? I'm involved with much web development and these issues are relatively minor unless working with a major company.

Yes, the rules are different, stricter for some companies, but in general, the understanding of what actually happens and the way the legal system works in these cases is abysmal.

lZakl




msg:848599
 7:07 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

Just an FYI... I used the Toyota logo and images from the Toyota website for a local Toyota dealer when I was a newbie. I figured, "Hey they are a Toyota dealer right? This implies that Toyota should have no problem with images of their vehicles on a dealer site right?" Wrong. I was contacted be a representitive saying that I did not get express permission for the images, and the fact that the images belonged to a photogrpher who was being paid for the USE of those photos meant they could not release them to me. I had no choice but to go take my own pictures of the vehicles on the lot. Personal experience tops conjecture ;0)

I know better nowthan to take images without at least asking first. Always ask, just don't "do".

-- Zak

beautykat




msg:848600
 8:25 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks for the wake up call! We have been taking pictures of our products all these while and thought that we have done a fairly good job of it. But we did noticed that some of them have been downloaded by others. Some of them ended up in blog (I wouldn't mind... this is probably free publicity) and some in ebay.

Say I decide to write to those folks using my pictures for commercial purposes, how do I go about proving that those pictures are indeed mine? Should I even be asking for loyalty fee? If so, how much? Other than putting your company's name/logo on all pictures, is there anyway we can "watermark" our jpg images?

Jon_King




msg:848601
 8:35 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

>>This implies that Toyota should have no problem with images of their vehicles on a dealer site right?" Wrong.

I won't argue this point further but you are wrong. There is plenty of case law concerning implied use.

Zak I respect your opinion but what happens in court and pre-court is very much different from a novice stating the law. It just plain doesn't work the way you say in the real world.

bird




msg:848602
 8:46 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

lZakl is absolutely correct.

Just because a manufacturer uses a picture doesn't mean they have the right to let you use it as well.

Using pictures without asking means asking for trouble instead.

Jon_King




msg:848603
 8:57 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

>>Using pictures without asking means asking for trouble instead.

Show me a common use instance of infringment (as I believe we are discussing) for affiliates and directories that has ended up in court. And I mean a you or me site, not a Yahoo or some big company, but a me or you.

It doesn't happen. If you receive a C&D, you remove the possible offenders and your done, over, nothing more.

Always take chances using quality images from your suppliers. If I went through the rigimarole for approval before I touched up an Adobe image on my Adobe Authorized Site we would both go nuts. Resonable use is expected. Use it. Don't be afraid.

Back on topic:
Is Scanning Pics from Magazines and Using it in Website against the law? Yes. So is j-walking.

I am not condoning stealing art in any way, if you have a legitimate use as an industry vendor or rep and folks here are telling me the that letter of the law says you shouldn't use the logo or image without explicit use spelled out in a contract I say foo, go ahead and don't use them, then see how well your site converts.

quadcity




msg:848604
 9:32 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

>is there anyway we can "watermark" our jpg images?
Hi BK. Photoshop has Digimark watermarking built in. Do you have a copy?

Jon_King




msg:848605
 9:36 pm on Apr 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

Good one, except that Adobe in the above example DOESN'T want me to ask permission.

Leosghost




msg:848606
 11:48 am on Apr 21, 2005 (gmt 0)

Hi BK. Photoshop has Digimark watermarking built in. Do you have a copy?

Actually it will only work if you have a digimarc account ..limited use is free ..after that you pay ..

Using your own visual watermarking /stamping on your images is better..

Scanning or copying images of any sort from sources that are not specifically marked as copyright free is stealing ...as a member of the Artistic community ( working in visual and 3D arts )..I always find it amazing that you can debate these points with such phrases as "fair use" ..or "accepted" or "common use instance of infringment" ..you would not think that you could use chunks of the text or films or videos of others without their express permission and yet the work of artists in static visual media is always considered to be fair game to use until we the artist or photographer complain ...

That is an argument which is quite frankly, disgusting and dishonest and amoral..

Always makes me wonder how the poster feels about theft of property from unlocked cars and houses or assault ..( "well your honour... she didn't say I couldn't so I just went ahead ..".

Jon_King




msg:848607
 1:11 pm on Apr 21, 2005 (gmt 0)

Sorry to cause such a stir but I'm really not suggesting to steal art.

Maybe a real case would help clarify, I just completed a 56 page catalog for a client. There are approx 85 photos in the piece. Each of these images has the clients’ products with imprinted logos on them. When adding up the logos, it comes to 187.

Every one of these logos is reproduced without the owners written permission. You need this permission to be legal.

Would you refuse to do the art until the client had proved to you each logo is reproduced with permission? I'm serious here, how would you handle it?

jschmitz




msg:848608
 1:41 pm on Apr 21, 2005 (gmt 0)

absolutely a violation, and one that many beauty companies actively pursue, whether you are selling there prods. or not.

Much better idea to contact manufacturer and get released, usable image.

bird




msg:848609
 1:53 pm on Apr 21, 2005 (gmt 0)

Would you refuse to do the art until the client had proved to you each logo is reproduced with permission?

Ultimately, your client is publishing the resulting site, and is therefore liable for the infringment. You should request a signature from your client that they will defend you against any claims that the copyright owners may direct at you.

Jon_King




msg:848610
 2:57 pm on Apr 21, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks Bird. That's exactly how I would handle the situation. You get a release from your client to protect yourself.

This however, does not live up to the white-hat way being insinuated by some posters. As I said, I know my client does not have permission to use these logos, they said so, so if I'm true to the spirit of the law I won't be a party to trademark infringment even if I can find a way to cover my arse with a release form. If I don't refuse some would say I fall into the disgusting and dishonest and amoral group.

bird




msg:848611
 3:51 pm on Apr 21, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks Bird. That's exactly how I would handle the situation. You get a release from your client to protect yourself.

The primary goal is always to protect yourself from possible troubles.

In contrast to you, however, the original poster asked about publishing copied images on their own site. In that situation, the only real protection is in asking the copyright owners for permission (which of course includes figuring out who the copyright owners actually are).

Jon_King




msg:848612
 4:15 pm on Apr 21, 2005 (gmt 0)

Yes indeed, I did get off track from the original topic.

Scanning images to use on your site from a magazine without written permission may or may not cause you problems depending on your relationship with the company that owns the copyright.

willybfriendly




msg:848613
 7:40 pm on Apr 21, 2005 (gmt 0)

Scanning images to use on your site from a magazine without written permission may or may not cause you problems depending on your relationship with the company that owns the copyright.

It may also involve the wording of the release signed by the model, which is what the OP asked about.

WBF

paulmc




msg:848614
 6:28 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

It all depends on who holds what rights over the images in question. If there is a model in the picture (as opposed to just a product) it is highly likely that a contract exists between the model and the owner of the photo. Whilst the owner of the photo (say Toyota) may be happy for the photos to be used as widely as possible because, afterall, it extends their advertising message it is MOST UNLIKELY that they are able to allow this because the model's contract almost always places clearly defined and strict limitations on the use of the image. Toyota may have only purchased the right to use the images in strictly defined geographical limits, in certain media and for a limited time period. The more famous the model, the more restrictive these clauses tend to be and the more ruthlessly they are enforced. If there is no model in the photo, the issue would be far less likely to be a problem.

Mardi_Gras




msg:848615
 3:27 am on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

>>Scanning images to use on your site from a magazine without written permission may or may not cause you problems

Whether it will cause you problems or not, it is stealing artwork. Just because someone may be able to get away with it doesn't make it right.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Code, Content, and Presentation / Site Graphics and Multimedia Design
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved