Home › Forums › Open Discussion › West Seattle Photos
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 30, 2013 at 8:10 pm #609798
birdrescuerParticipantThere are so many wonderful photos on the blog. I would love to have some to share with my friends all over the world to show them what heaven looks like. Anyone know how to get them, legally and free if possible.
December 1, 2013 at 7:01 am #800696
WSBKeymasterYou can’t send your friends links?
You can send a direct link to any WSB item by either right-clicking its headline to get the direct URL, or by using “Share This” at the bottom of any item, which will give you sharing options from e-mailing to sharing via social media.
No photo here can be legally republished to another website but sharing a link is fine.
Or did you mean some other kind of sharing?
-Tracy
December 1, 2013 at 7:22 pm #800697
birdrescuerParticipantWell, I wanted just the photos that you use most days: birds, sunsets, etc. I don’t necessarily want to send the entire blog.
December 1, 2013 at 7:27 pm #800698
JanSParticipantso right click on the picture, click on “save image as”, create a folder(or add to one), and add the pictures to an email as an attachment
December 1, 2013 at 9:11 pm #800699
MSWSMemberJan and Bird
Right clicking and saving copyrighted images is theft of intellectual property. If the image is properly copyrighted you can be held libel for any future income that particular image could produce.
I have spent thousands of dollars on my camera gear and sometimes spend thousands of dollars to stand in a place to take an image. It’s my job as a freelance stock image photographer.
As a West Seattle neighbor and photographer I would like to share some of my images with my local community through the WSB.
Most of the images i see from local photographers are watermarked with a copyright and a name, if not also a photo credit.
The watermarks are mostly placed in a lower corner to let you see more image instead of through the center of the image to protect the image from theft.
Perhaps if you searched the photographer online or through the forums you could buy a small file sized image to own and legitimately send to your friends.
… or as TR says send them a link.
December 1, 2013 at 9:36 pm #800700
GinaParticipantTest send yourself the link from the blog to reassure yourself that you aren’t sending the whole blog. It really does work.
December 2, 2013 at 2:30 am #800701
JanSParticipantMSWS..would a link to the WSB Flickr page be off limits, too?
December 2, 2013 at 3:43 am #800702
MSWSMemberJan
I am not associated with the WSB Flickr page and cannot answer your question for them. WSB or TR might have an answer for you.
I chose not to associate with Flickr… too many stories of image thefts.
As far as linking to a site or an image, I would think the photographer would be thankful for the link, exposure and due credit.
You might also choose to contact the photographer and request permission to use the image or link.
December 2, 2013 at 8:12 am #800703
WSBKeymasterIf something is posted online and you can access it – sharing A LINK requires NO PERMISSION WHATSOEVER. You can publish the **link** – not the content of what is at the link but the LINK ITSELF – or send it to someone, or tweet it, or Facebook it, whatever.
However, the CONTENT of what is linked to – the words and/or images on the page that the link TAKES you to – may not be lifted without express permission, *unless* the site has a specific disclaimer/advisory saying that everything is open to public use, repurposing, whatever, which is fairly uncommon. The only exception: If the work was created by a public employee in the course of performing his/her duties. (This is why, for example, you will see us and other news organizations republish pictures of government facilities taken from gov’t websites.)
Again, I hope that’s clear. A link – the actual text such as
can be linked, sent, shared with impunity. Don’t ever let ANYONE tell you that you cannot *link* to something that is publicly visible. (We actually have had a couple people claim that over the years and it is laughable. If you don’t want someone to link to your webpage, then make it password protected.)
But you cannot just download a photo you find on a webpage and send it to someone, post it on a page, post it to social media, etc. That is copyright violation and out-and-out theft.
You technically are within your rights to right-click on a photo and send the resulting LINK to someone. However, as a content creator/publisher, I would say that’s not particularly ideal because it means you’re sending it without the context, without the credit, etc. And even if you send that photo-only link with the best of intentions, you can’t control what happens to it next place down the line; over the course of a couple months, a few years ago, both we and another news organization inadvertently published one photo each that was taken by a photographer from the other news organization – then redistributed as if it were somebody else’s work. We had photographed a local business owner; the local business lifted the photo from our site and posted it on social media without the link to the accompanying article putting the photo into context; somebody else lifted the photo off Facebook and sent it to the other news organization along with an announcement relating to the business! Imagine our surprise when we saw our photo uncredited on another commercial news website.
On the flip side, we got an announcement about a local arts event, asked if there was a relevant photo of preparations for the event, and the organizers sent us several. Unfortunately, they had attached to the e-mail not only photos they took, but photos taken by another news photographer who had apparently sent them copies in addition to publishing some on their own site. The entire group of photos was represented to us as taken by volunteer photographers on behalf of the arts organization, so we chose one and then were startled to get a note from the other news publication saying, that photo was taken by our photographer, take it down immediately.
Sorry to digress. I do think the idea of sending someone a link to the WSB Flickr gallery is a good one:
http://flickr.com/groups/westseattleblog
The photos are almost entirely taken by other contributors, each of whom is linked to their photo, and we opened it with a disclaimer that posting to the group means permission is given for us to publish the photo if we choose. Flickr does have a setting where people can disable downloads if they choose.
Hope that helps a bit.
Tracy
December 2, 2013 at 6:18 pm #800704
cjboffoliParticipantAs a photographer who deals with copyright issues almost every day I appreciate the sense of caution described here. But I just wanted to say that the kind of sharing that is being described by the OP (non-commercial, person-to-person sharing of low resolution images) doesn’t bother me very much, even when it is done without attribution. The problem for me begins whenever my images are reposted/ rehosted/ published somewhere else and used as free content. That’s where I think it crosses the line. Just my two cents.
December 2, 2013 at 11:25 pm #800705
birdrescuerParticipantThank you all. This has been very enlightening.
December 3, 2013 at 2:19 am #800706
dhgParticipantThe fair use doctrine has been fairly hammered but still stands. You can send a photo to someone without violating the copyright laws. It should go without saying that anyone who posts anything online should be aware of the copyright laws, know the source of the photo, and have proper permissions to make use of it. But personal use, including sending a photo to someone to say look, how beautiful, is expressly legal under the fair use doctrine.
December 3, 2013 at 2:57 am #800707
cjboffoliParticipantdhg: Though this is a matter of continuing debate, the law actually is not as simple as you suggest. Fair Use protects things like criticism, parody, commentary, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research, etc. It might be a stretch to say that appreciating some photographs and wanting to download them and e-mail them to a friend would fit into any of those categories. There is also the subject of “market harm.” For instance, if a wedding photographer derived income from shooting images at a wedding and then people started downloading and sharing them front the photographer’s website without any compensation to the photographer that might also cross a line.
If I were to walk into Bakery Nouveau and take a loaf of bread without paying for it, even if I just want to eat it myself and maybe give some to my friends for free, I’m still doing something that’s not right. Someone had to make that loaf of bread, investing time, many years of experience and specialized equipment. And likewise, someone had to make that photograph being shared.
December 3, 2013 at 3:29 am #800708
dhgParticipantWhat did you just say….commentary…..? Yeah, sending it to a friend would fall under that. This is nothing like stealing a loaf of bread. Your copyright protects you from commercial exploitation. Someone sending a photo to a friend is not a commercial venture.
December 3, 2013 at 3:48 am #800709
cjboffoliParticipantExcept that’s not really commentary. Quoting a few lines of prose in a book review, summarizing the results of a recent scientific research for a report, etc. That’s commentary as there’s a public benefit to that, not just two friends privately sharing some sunset images they didn’t create. There’s no “transformative” purpose to the latter. I disagree that there is a difference between a commodity created by a baker and that created by a photographer. If I choose not to mind if strangers want to share a few slices of my bread among themselves that is up to me. But I’m not about to be cavalier about telling people they are free to take and eat someone else’s bread.
December 3, 2013 at 5:54 am #800710
JanSParticipantI know this has come up before, and we’ve had discussions about it. I think people get confused at times. If it’s on Facebook, for instance, with the word “share” below it, people share. And then people assume that other pictures maybe could be shared,too, which they can’t. I know I have shared pictures posted by West Seattle Blog on FB, which probably are also on the original blog. It doesn’t say I can’t share those pictures from FB specifically, so “I” (the general “I”) assume that I can just share pictures from the original blog.
The interwebs are sooo confusing sometimes. Glad you keep educating , Christopher.
December 3, 2013 at 10:01 pm #800711
dhgParticipantOK, CJ, next time you browse someone’s coffee table book (not yours, of course) on their coffee table, be sure to send a check to the publisher. Wouldn’t want you taking bread from their mouth.
December 3, 2013 at 10:22 pm #800712
cjboffoliParticipantAt least in that scenario SOMEONE has fairly compensated the photographer for the work they’ve done. Someone paid for the loaf and is sharing the bread. Different than just taking something for free.
December 4, 2013 at 12:32 am #800713
LindseyParticipantThere’s a big difference between sending your friend a LINK to a photo; and downloading, saving, and sending the actual photo to your friend. You can certainly appreciate the photographer’s work by directing your friend to the photographer’s website. But where you get into trouble is downloading and saving photos.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.