Copyright infringement or overreaction?

Mike68495 · Jan 1, 2003

The unemployed one who needs to go feed the dingo.

Mike Fitzgerald said:
Jim said:

... they should belong to the church, which includes
the congregation ...

Click to expand...

Oh, good grief! By that reasoning, any member of the congregation
should feel entitled to borrow the pastor's car any time s/he feels
so inclined. And to do so, moreover, without even troubling to ask
first.

If that sounds crassly absurd, then good -- I've made my point.

Mike (the one without the world under his skin, btw)

--
F717 (ya!), S230 (carry it everywhere), S40 (wife), Oly 2000 (Kid)

Mike68495 · Jan 1, 2003

a license to view the prints?? Hilarious!! Can we get a copy of the license agreement posted. BWAHHHHHHHH.

Ed (;¬ > ) said:
The point is that she never gave or donated the photos to the
church. they were posted on the board for viewing only. Statements
were published to the effect that copies could be optained from
Lisa for a buck each.

What lisa donated was her time and talent and a license to view the
prints.

-Ed ( All my best for the New Year ) W.
http://www.pbase.com/ewaldorph/dpreview
Sony F505v w/Canon 500D +2 Diopter lens

Scutellata said:

Question,
If the pictures you have taken are of the church and or church
functions for the church as part of your tithe , aren’t the
pictures now church property and no longer yours? I think the
donated pictures are out of your hands. Now if this lady stole your
pictures from your privet stash then I think you could take action
like send her the bill for the picture.

--
Some IR and more, My tiny F707 Album.
http://home.earthlink.net/~metodd/index/Index.htm

Click to expand...

--
F717 (ya!), S230 (carry it everywhere), S40 (wife), Oly 2000 (Kid)

Mike68495 · Jan 1, 2003

What you're trying to do, is build your business by doing work for the church. And the church exists because of its parishoners. The church IS the parishoners. If not, what is it? That big stone building? Since you obviously are not interested in truely giving to the church, why not just give up on the photo thing. It appears to be much to complicated since you won't really give the work away. Instead, work at the next church spaghetti dinner. There are no stings attached, and each parishoner owns their own spaghetti...... don't use your own sauce recipe..... that might result in some copyright problems.

lisafx said:
Erichatch said:

I'd say it depends on your purpose in donating the photos.
Legally, of course they're yours, but that's not a relevant
concern because you haven't been materially damaged.

That said, if your purpose is to render a service, you should
render it without strings. In other words, REALLY give the images
away, including the right to make copies.

Click to expand...

I did, indeed render a service - TO THE CHURCH. Not to the
parishoner who took the photo down. The church would probably not
appreciate it either, since no one connected with the church was
asked. The woman who did it is notorious for always doing the
wrong thing and is taken with a heap of salt by everyone, including
me. Furthermore, rendering the "service" did not mean that I
released all right to the photos. When a gift is given, the giver
and receiver have and understanding about what is given. That does
not give the right to a third party to take a part of that gift.

lisafx said:

On the other hand, if you are using the church work as a
door-opener for a business, then you should properly identify that
and put a notice in the church bulletin plainly stating that this
was an "introductory offer" and that copies are only to be made by
you. But your timing will be bad, because your motive will now
look small-minded whether or not you intend it to be, and you'll
be making your parishoners wrong, which it's guaranteed they won't
appreciate. Is making them wrong going to help or hurt your
prospective business?

Click to expand...

Everyone at our church has business cards posted and many of us try
to support our fellow members in their businesses and they support
us. I don't see anything wrong with that. It is an established
practice at our church. I don't know if that's unusual or not,
never having attended another one. And of course I don't want ot
hurt anyone's feelings or make them feel wrong, hence this original
post, which has, as I hoped, yeilded some very constructive advice.

lisafx said:

So whether you're over-reacting or not depends on the value you
place on ownership vs. the value you place on giving to the church.
How would the founder of your church behave in a similar position?
The answer to that will either make you feel good or feel crummy.
Either way, your feeling tells you where you stand in the matter
and then you get to decide if you're over-reacting or not.

Click to expand...

To me it shouldn't be an either or situation. I should be able to
render a valuable service to the church, which the members enjoy
and almost universally are responsible in their use, without having
to subject myself to the unauthorized use of my pictures.

Much of this thread seems to imply that my church has somehow
"misused" my pictures. They haven't. They couldn't, because, as
you pointed out, I donated the unconditional rights FOR THE CHURCH
to use the pictures. As I have stated until my fingers are numb,
the woman who took the pictures was not acting for the church, but
taking the pictures to copy and give away as gifts. Not only is
that wrong from my perspective, a enlargement of a 4x6 inkjet print
is a pretty cheesy gift.

lisafx said:

If it were me, I'd try letting go both of the pictures and of the
feelings you're experiencing. Probably be better for business in
the long run.

Click to expand...

I agree.

--
LisaFX
http://www.pbase.com/lisafx
Canon S20, Sony S75, F707

--
F717 (ya!), S230 (carry it everywhere), S40 (wife), Oly 2000 (Kid)

Jason Conner · Jan 1, 2003

That would bother me too. Just because I give something to someone for free doesn't mean that everybody else can take it for free too.

Technically, you gave the pix to the church, so the lady took them from the church. She should have asked them for permission, so you were probably right not to talk to her about it. It was cheesey, but not really your gig at that point.

I would just put my copyright on future works. The church shouldn't mind because they probably won't be selling your photos. And it would be good advertising for you too. I discrete little classy watermark in the corner would be good.

So, to answer your question, yes it was copyright infringement, and no you weren't really overreacting when you felt that little twist in your stomach upon your discovery. Watermark your images and consider it a left-handed complement.

lisafx said:
I have been trying to get a local photo business going. Nothing
major, but I am hoping it will build. For about a year I have been
shooting all my church's events for free, as part of my tithe.
They reimburse me for the ink and paper to print them out. I then
post some of the best ones on the church bulliten board for
everyone to enjoy.

The other day I overheard a woman at my church telling her friend
how she had taken one of my pictures from the bulletin board, taken
it to have "enlargements" done and then given these enlargements as
Christmas gifts. This wasn't a picture of her, BTW, but of the
members she ended up "making the gift" for.

What should I do about this? I know she didn't mean any harm, but
I was really annoyed. Especially since I have made all the
pictures available to any church member who wants them at $1.00
each , which is my printing cost. I didn't say anything to her
because I didn't want to overreact. I am thinking about getting an
ink stamp and stamping the backs of all my pictures with the
copyright and the words "do not copy without written permission".
What do you all think?

--
LisaFX
http://www.pbase.com/lisafx
Canon S20, Sony S75, F707

lharris · Jan 1, 2003

Lots of interesting thoughts here.

My take on the solution--

You seem to want this not to occur again and to cause the least amount of badwill at this occurence so...

Sit down with a discreet person at the church and make clear in a soft way what you are doing and who owns what and follow up with a nice letter that summarizes it. Maybe, they could acknowledge what you do and allow you some free advertising for your work or at the least some notices about the photos.

Posting a notice in the bulletin seemed nice but the earlier wording seemed a bit harsh. I would go more for sometihing along the lines of-

The church is pleased to thank Lisa for her photographic ability and wants

also to let the congregants know that if anyone is interested in using her photos for church or personal use. to please contact Lisa. (No one wants to embarass that woman.)

In the future you may want to partner with the church that a percent of the sales of photos used for holiday cards etc, go to the church fund. In that case--you should up the price.

Lastly-I would nicely thank that woman for liking your work. Let her know that it didn't occur to you that someone might use the photos that way--and of course, no problem with this episode--but it alerted you to being more on top of your work. Let her know that she might see these notices and that they are not directed at her. If you really want to go the distance, you might even offer her the chance to use another photo next year as a gift...but after that it would be paid for.

Taking the high road can be lonely--but you might be surprised at how great the trip.

Good luck.

lisafx said:
Unfortunately, our Sunday announcements already state that the pics
are available for $1.00, so that's pretty well known around our
church. They are also on the church website where everyone has
access to them.
Maybe I will word my stamp a bit more tactfully, as you suggest,
Steve, but I want it phrased in such a way that no lab will copy
them in the future.

Thanks again for the tea and sympathy

lisafx said:

I have been trying to get a local photo business going. Nothing
major, but I am hoping it will build. For about a year I have been
shooting all my church's events for free, as part of my tithe.
They reimburse me for the ink and paper to print them out. I then
post some of the best ones on the church bulliten board for
everyone to enjoy.

The other day I overheard a woman at my church telling her friend
how she had taken one of my pictures from the bulletin board, taken
it to have "enlargements" done and then given these enlargements as
Christmas gifts. This wasn't a picture of her, BTW, but of the
members she ended up "making the gift" for.

What should I do about this? I know she didn't mean any harm, but
I was really annoyed. Especially since I have made all the
pictures available to any church member who wants them at $1.00
each , which is my printing cost. I didn't say anything to her
because I didn't want to overreact. I am thinking about getting an
ink stamp and stamping the backs of all my pictures with the
copyright and the words "do not copy without written permission".
What do you all think?

--
LisaFX
http://www.pbase.com/lisafx
Canon S20, Sony S75, F707

Click to expand...

--
LisaFX
http://www.pbase.com/lisafx
Canon S20, Sony S75, F707

Mike Fitzgerald · Jan 1, 2003

..since he's gone off to deposit something unmentionable in the church porch. Oh dear! Despite all the assurances here that the church's property exists for my own use at my whim, I've little doubt the chuch will have the gall to complain, too... :-(

Mike said:
The unemployed one who needs to go feed the dingo.

Mike Fitzgerald · Jan 1, 2003

... you're going to ruin that lovely one-a-week average at this rate.

Shay Stephens · Jan 1, 2003

I have been in contact with this guy who basically ripped off my whole website. He has made some changes but it still looks and sounds a little too much like my website:
http://www.gofci.com

--
Shay

My Sony F707 & F717 Gallery: http://www.shaystephens.com/portfolio.asp
My F717 Observations: http://www.shaystephens.com/f717.asp

John Little · Jan 1, 2003

Lisa, I think if you make an "offer to do reprints," many people would choose to decline your "offer" because they can make a copy cheaper themselves! I believe a tactful "requirement" that any reprints come from you will work better than an "offer."

John

lisafx wrote:
I had ordered a stamp

lisafx said:
that was pretty strongly worded, but I am wondering if something
tactful listing my copyright, phone number and offer to do reprints
& enlargements would be more tactful and still get the job done?

--
LisaFX
http://www.pbase.com/lisafx
Canon S20, Sony S75, F707

Mike Fitzgerald · Jan 1, 2003

Ed (;¬ > ) said:
... I'm afraid most of those folks for
whom you are holding up the mirror of introspection won't notice
themselves...

Oh, I've no doubt your northern winter has left it conveniently fogged while they work on an excuse for the rest of the year ;-)

Ed (;¬ >) said:
-Ed ( All my best for the New Year ) W.

Mike ( And to you, cobber! ) F.

Search

Copyright infringement or overreaction?

Mike68495

Active member

Mike68495

Active member

Mike68495

Active member

Jason Conner

Forum Enthusiast

lharris

Veteran Member

Mike Fitzgerald

Veteran Member

Mike Fitzgerald

Veteran Member

Shay Stephens

Forum Pro

John Little

Leading Member

Mike Fitzgerald

Veteran Member

Keyboard shortcuts