Reading mode: Light Dark

Are there still Ethics and Morals these days?

Go to last post
Do you know anything about the law? I've personally got off on a charge because I "lacked intent", so yes, it does work as a defence. Not in all cases but surely in some. I know from personal experience. It's not just in sentencing, my dear.

Even if it was, and that intent only influenced sentencing, surely that applies here, too. Poster wanted to share some joy with us, whether they did it in the right way or wrong way. "Punishment", or her sentence, should be a heads up on how to do it properly. Instead, the sentence she got was a tongue lashing.

If you wanted to be really harsh I think the most you could say would be the poster was ignorant or uneducated, not unethical or immoral.
 
PenguinPhotoCo said:
Did anyone stop to think that maybe the photog offered files for sale and the op decided it was cheaper to scan the prints, therefore actually cheating the photog? We don't know that anymore than we know the op had permission to scan and post the print. Why assume 'the best' of the person causing the infringement?
Click to expand...
We can't assume the best but it's Ok for you to assume the worst.

What if the daughter did by a CD of hi rez images.........but the Grandfather was only given a print for his method of display. Which he scanned because that's all he had access to. You don't know for sure if any theft has actually taken place.

--
Nick in Shanghai.
 
PenguinPhotoCo said:
HE POSTED PICTURES WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF THE PHOTOGRAPHER.
HE DID NOT CREDIT THE PHOTOGRAPHER.
Click to expand...
For the harder of hearing: WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT HE DOESN'T HAVE PERMISSION

So what if he didn't credit the photographer. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT RIGHTS HE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE GRANTED
PenguinPhotoCo said:
WE ARE PHOTOGRAPHERS. IF THIS HAPPENED TO YOU YOU WOULD BE P!SSED OFF.
Click to expand...
NO NO I WOULDN'T.

--
Nick in Shanghai.
 
..by asking ourselves: Do we have illegal copies of songs, videos, ...anything, downloaded for free from the Net ?
 
Ahh Ha !

The OP has posted on the other thread that he might be in the wrong so............KILL HIM.

He does make a good point about fair use regarding the criticism angle as the praise is fair criticism in his eyes but .................KILL HIM ANYWAY :)

So my apologies to Penguin. The OP may have violated copyright after his admission. However you jumped on him before you knew what permissions he had or more accurately didn't have. And the manor in which you jumped on him is IMHO way over the top and completely out of whack for the severity of breech of copyright or lack of it in this instance.

And to my fellow photographers I suggest that you start charging decent fees and day rates that will cover these types of transgressions that will no doubt occur more frequently in this digital age of sharing. Chasing people thru the courts can be costly and time consuming and what you eventually gain will more likely than not not cover all expenses incurred. You'll just end up bitter twisted and financially worse off. So just charge according from the get go.

--
Nick in Shanghai.
 
Just thought I'd pop back in to see what nonsense you were up to and I see that you cannot remember what you started all this with so here it is, word for word. You need to work on keeping your stories straight.

PenquinPhotoCo wrote

"Making mom cry has nothing to do with the quality of the photography - it's totally based on the subject.

Now as to the photography...that's $7/hour walmart quality there. Double catch lights in the eyes is an error on the photographers part. the skin could use touching up.

I'd like to see more contrast, but as you say, it's scan so that's probably part of it.

Pose wise the head should be turned more to hide an ear on the one side, but at this age you can't expect it.

just because the image is in focus, good wb and good exposure does not by itself make this a good photograph. "
PenguinPhotoCo said:
I AM NOT UPSET THAT HE'S HAPPY WITH THE PICTURES. GOOD FOR HIM AND HIS FAMILY.

HE POSTED PICTURES WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF THE PHOTOGRAPHER.
HE DID NOT CREDIT THE PHOTOGRAPHER.

WE ARE PHOTOGRAPHERS. IF THIS HAPPENED TO YOU YOU WOULD BE P!SSED OFF.

SEE THESE THREADS FROM THIS FORUM ABOUT IMAGES BEING STOLEN AND/OR HOW A PHOTOG CAN PROTECT THEIR IMAGES FROM BEING STOLEN.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=34246269
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=33718819
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=33450878
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=33284703
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=33503572

So how come when this community comes face to face with someone that's done it they defend it?? /

--
If I knew how to take a good picture I'd do it every time.
Click to expand...
 
you haven't been paying attention or you'd know the OP's a man.
--
If I knew how to take a good picture I'd do it every time.
 
read all the posts and you'll find a couple where he checks and quotes copyright law to see if he violated it.
At no time did he claim he had permission. That says he didn't.
Nick in Shanghai said:
For the harder of hearing: WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT HE DOESN'T HAVE PERMISSION

So what if he didn't credit the photographer. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT RIGHTS HE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE GRANTED
Click to expand...
He loves the work of the photog. So why not name him? Fear of a search showing the images posted without permission is one reason. Not knowing, or bothering to find out, who the photog was is another.
Neither answer is good for photographers.
Nick in Shanghai said:
Nick in Shanghai said:
WE ARE PHOTOGRAPHERS. IF THIS HAPPENED TO YOU YOU WOULD BE P!SSED OFF.
Click to expand...
NO NO I WOULDN'T.
Click to expand...
The only photogs that say that are amateurs. they are satisfied with payment of ego stroking.
 
Maybe you'd be better off if all you potential clients could see you attitude first. I wonder how many would hire you after reading your posts here? Of course, I bet your attitude proceeds you.

"Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching or scholarship. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. The term "fair use" originated in the United States. A similar principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions. Civil law jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright."

http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm
 
We all critiqued the photos whether we admit it or not, posted a word about it or not. You saw the image and you formed an opnion.

Damn, I voiced my opinion. Send me to the gulag! Oh, wait, this is america and I thought it was permitted to speak one's mind. My mistake.

Posting other people's work, poorly reproduced, and without credit is OK though.

I must have be the only one that paid attention in civics and ethics classes.

Or I've entered some alternate reality. I don't remember falling in the rabbit hole.

Hello, Alice? Are you there?
--
If I knew how to take a good picture I'd do it every time.
 
Yes, I made an assumption.

I was not born yesterday and this isn't my first day on forums either. I've seen this type of thing before -many times. I've seen it IRL (in real life) as well. It doesn't take a PhD to reach the conclusion I came to.

I'm just surprised how many are defending his 'right' to do what he did, when what he did was wrong. Or at least, if you want to consider intent, inconsiderate.

--
If I knew how to take a good picture I'd do it every time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top