Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Forum Moderators: not2easy
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?
Another safer way to go is stock photos, which I recommend. Generic beauty product shots should be easy to find and not expensive.
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.
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.
I know better nowthan to take images without at least asking first. Always ask, just don't "do".
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?
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.
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.
Hi BK. Photoshop has Digimark watermarking built in. Do you have a copy?
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 ..".
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?
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.