| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/01/2003 10:00:30 AM · #1 |
I have an E-mail from friend from Chicago today:
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 12:18:10 -0500
Kosta, I was watching channel 5 news this morning and behind the news anchor was your picture of the fountain you took that was lit up, it was the picture you won an award for!!!! It was blown up poster size! You are now famous.
What I should do now?
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:09:18 AM · #2 |
Contact the television station and insist that they give you credit (in a large, splashy interview :-D) for the photo they used without permission.
Remind them that copyright infringement carries large fines if they argue with you.
Shari
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:17:28 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by shareinnc:
Contact the television station and insist that they give you credit (in a large, splashy interview :-D) for the photo they used without permission.
Remind them that copyright infringement carries large fines if they argue with you.
Shari |
I didn't see it with my own eyes ,but Patricia a DPC member saw it, so I'm not 100% sure!
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:20:11 AM · #4 |
I dunno if they would be able to blow up a 640 image to 'poster size'. Perhaps it was just a similar photo of the same place.
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:24:12 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Konador:
I dunno if they would be able to blow up a 640 image to 'poster size'. Perhaps it was just a similar photo of the same place. |
Tv screen puts 525 lines so 600 dpi is quite enough for a studio monitor!
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:24:50 AM · #6 |
Call the station and ask who the photograper is. Tell them that a friend saw the picture and thought it was one you'd taken. Mention that you just wanted to try and clear it up before you talked to your copyright lawyer. That usually tends to get some quick action. If it really is yours, like shari says, copyright infringement can carry large fines. Just call them and see.
I just moved to the Chicago area. Where is that fountain? lol. I guess I've been pretty much stuck in the suburbs.
Message edited by author 2003-06-01 14:25:43. |
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:27:51 AM · #7 |
drive 290 all the way to the end and one light before Lake Shore Drive is Grant Park and the fountain!
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:28:46 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Originally posted by Konador:
I dunno if they would be able to blow up a 640 image to 'poster size'. Perhaps it was just a similar photo of the same place. |
Tv screen puts 525 lines so 600 dpi is quite enough for a studio monitor! |
Did you submit this photo to the tv station or did they steal it from one of your online portfolios? |
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:30:13 AM · #9 |
They took it from DPC, I guess, I haven't given anyone an Electronic copy!
Next news are at 5 PM I have to watch to see if is still there, but that makes me famous :-) !
Message edited by author 2003-06-01 14:32:34.
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:31:20 AM · #10 |
The dpc file isnt 600dpi surely??
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:37:18 AM · #11 |
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:38:33 AM · #12 |
I would have thought it would look very pixelated on a tv even so, but then what do i know :)
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 10:45:46 AM · #13 |
They might well have sent someone there to shoot that, or used a stock photo, unless it includes the caption and stuff in which case I'd say it's pretty clear-cut.
If you actually need to take legal action, you will need to register the image with the Copyright Office. |
|
|
|
06/01/2003 11:26:21 AM · #14 |
i'll try and remember to watch at 5
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 11:51:26 AM · #15 |
| Didn't you sell a print of this shot on DPCPrints? |
|
|
|
06/01/2003 12:09:05 PM · #16 |
Kosta - my understanding is that you don't need to register to assert your copyrights. This was found on the page that Paul linked:
HOW TO SECURE A COPYRIGHT
Copyright Secured Automatically upon Creation
The way in which copyright protection is secured is frequently misunderstood. No publication or registration or other action in the Copyright Office is required to secure copyright. (See following Note.) There are, however, certain definite advantages to registration. See "Copyright Registration."
Copyright is secured automatically when the work is created, and a work is "created" when it is fixed in a copy or phonorecord for the first time. "Copies" are material objects from which a work can be read or visually perceived either directly or with the aid of a machine or device, such as books, manuscripts, sheet music, film, videotape, or microfilm. "Phonorecords" are material objects embodying fixations of sounds (excluding, by statutory definition, motion picture soundtracks), such as cassette tapes, CDs, or LPs. Thus, for example, a song (the "work") can be fixed in sheet music (" copies") or in phonograph disks (" phonorecords"), or both.
If a work is prepared over a period of time, the part of the work that is fixed on a particular date constitutes the created work as of that date.
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 12:15:19 PM · #17 |
| But it needs to be registered before you can sue for damages. Certainly you can (and should) assert your rights immediately; hopefully this will not become (literally) a Federal case... |
|
|
|
06/01/2003 12:36:42 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Konador:
I would have thought it would look very pixelated on a tv even so, but then what do i know :) |
hmm, if i remember correctly from my video classes and internship at a local tv station, the picture comes off of a digital video camera (say a canon XL1) at 720x480. even with the 525 vertical scan lines, im pretty sure only roughly about 480 get used. even then, with the aspect ratio of 1.33:1, the video is still going to be cropped horizontally somewhat, so i could be wrong, but it seems like any picture from this website could technically be pulled and used for tv.
ive linked one of my standard (standard in format--not content!) :) video title frame here. notice how far it had to be pushed to the right to appear centered on a normal 4:3 television screen. then just out of curiosity, i added one of my own pics formatted for dpc into the frame here. almost perfect, with only a small amount of cropping--but any tv editor could change the resolution for a perfect fit. interesting.
Message edited by author 2003-06-01 16:41:12. |
|
|
|
06/01/2003 12:41:30 PM · #19 |
@frisca - GenE is right by US law. You have the copyright as soon as the work is created, but you do not get to SUE until you register.
And yes, you can register after infringement and sue for that infringement that happened before you registered. I don't write them (yet) I just know them.
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 12:47:17 PM · #20 |
:) I don't think its quite the same in Canada re: registration, but I didn't want kosta to think that he had NO rights because he didn't register. Thanks for the clear up though. I know Paul knows I was not disputing his info. :)
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 01:44:37 PM · #21 |
A few points from a TV broadcast guy for you to ponder...
1./ You will need to prove that the image used is the exact same image, and not a similar image taken by someone else, or from a stock library.
Broadcasters are very aware of property rights and it would be a bit of a reach to believe that this is the same image. But, not impossible. So, it is worth exploring, if for nothing more than the fun of it. Often, they capture their images from video footage, rather than from a still library or from the web. And, these images are used over again as static backgrounds in newscasts, to roll credits over, show weather details, etc.
2./ A still image on a NTSC TV screen as seen in North America is approximately 1 megabyte (720 pixels by 480 lines by RGB, typically). The 525 lines mentioned is the total scan area in a 2:1 interlaced picture with two fields combining to make up a single TV frame (30 per second). The first 21 lines are not used for visible picture, they are used for the vertical interval So, the DPC standard 150k JPEG would not likely be used. Some video compression, still store, and image manipulation systems use line doubling or extrapolation software on the images too. But, the TV rule is garbage in / garbage out. This comment refers to the technical ramifications, not the image in question. It would be likely that a sub 150k image would be used as it would display artifacts even with manipulation. So, it would likely not be suitable.
3./ Concerning legal rights, this months issue of Photo Life (a Canadian photographic publication) has a wonderful article outlining the legal rights for still photography. Canada, the United States and many other countries often share common language on these issues, so it is likely that it is similar in both countries, if not identical.
I have had many images go to air over the years. There is not really any money available for them, very small amounts really. Newspapers are a much better source of revenue with a newsworthy image.
Once, I had an airplane crash in front of me at the CNE Airshow. I was shooting with two Nikon F2s in those's days. I had a high speed sequence shot with a 300mm lens. It showed the plane falling into Lake Ontario nose first, and it was spread over six consecutive frames. A newspaper purchased my film "sight unseen" on the spot. I eventually received $200 and photography credit. I enjoyed the notoriety far more than the money (funds were spent on beer with my chums - headache resulted).
|
|
|
|
06/01/2003 06:19:20 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Morgan:
A few points from a TV broadcast guy for you to ponder.... |
You said in detail what I tried to summarize...thanks.
Check out the results of a rudimentary image search at Altavista
//www.altavista.com/
use Chicago and fountain
as the search criteria...
Message edited by author 2003-06-01 22:19:32. |
|
|
|
06/01/2003 06:47:29 PM · #23 |
On showing images, 640x480's broadcast perfectly well. I've had a couple of really small (sub 150k) image used as a backdrops on commercial TV without any real artefact problems. TV is really low resolution compared to an equivalent PC monitor and the image sizes we use here are prefectly adequate for broadcast quality, especially as a backdrop.
Message edited by author 2003-06-02 10:25:00. |
|
|
|
06/01/2003 06:54:44 PM · #24 |
| firstr find out where thay got the picture from. If they got it off the internet find where, what site, then find out where those people got the image from. Then you know who else to yell at. |
|
|
|
06/01/2003 07:07:37 PM · #25 |
I live about two hours from Chicago and this is one of the most famous fountains in the city. Not to rain on the parade, but it is very likely that it is a simialr, yet different photo.
For example, this fountain was the fountain that was used on the start to Married with Children.... |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2025 04:03:39 AM EDT.
