Magazine photo "lifted" from Flickr without permission

Started Jan 25, 2011 | Discussions thread
oomomo Junior Member • Posts: 41
Re: Photograph rubbish skips

Who cares about how you think? We civilized people have LAWS regarding this. We don't stoop down to your level.

SirLataxe wrote:

Self-righteous Ones,

Photographs published on a sharing s website have already been given away to the world. They no longer belong to the photographer but have become like common-land - anyone can graze their sheep on them, as it were. Moaning about "nicking" from such a website is like whining about an enterprising fellow taking your rubbish from a skip where you have chucked it and making something useful out of it with some effort and imagination.

The value that such a photograph has to the user who picked it off the web consists mostly in a lot of work that person or organisation does to make the photo a useful element in their enterprise. The photographer who took the photo took just a few minutes to take and publish it and has, as I mentioned, given it away already by publishing on a file sharing website. By itself, such an image has very little instrinsic value, if any. It didn't take any work to make as ther photographer was in fact at play and the photos are low grade incidentals from a day out or a bit of camera-fondling.

You would-be commercial photogs need to get real. Either you have given your photos away to the world or you haven't. If you want to sell them, do the necessary high production values in making them, the marketing effort to sell them and the business overhead (including sales tax, book-keeping and all the rest) that any other business must suffer.

SirLataxe, exasperated by self-important "photographers" who think their accidental snaps are some sort of gold-dust when they are in fact a very low-grade iron ore or even slag.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow