How do you feel seeing your photos used for profit? [Archive]

Archive

12-31-2006, 07:41 PM

Posted By: Jim ClarkeI'm sure many of us have seen our own cards we still own, being used on other people's sites for reference. Many times I see CD's on Ebay that have many items on them. Many from this board alone. Don't you think someone would get permission to show anyone else's photo before using it? A couple of examples come to mind... Seeing an article in a magazine that uses your card without given credit or asking first. How about an online business site who takes in money for information on cards. I do not mind people who ask to use images for information, but I want to know before hand. I'm all for educating people on cards but not by thieving images and profiting by it... Am I over reacting on this, or is anyone else on the same page as me????? JC

Archive

12-31-2006, 07:51 PM

Posted By: Dan BrettaI have seen many of my photos used on different websites, and I wouldn't doubt that some people have stolen images from my photobucket site to use on their CD's, but I don't really get upset about it. I get a lot of satisfaction knowing that I own the original copy of the photo. There are a few photos that I have put "watermarks" on that I don't want to see used. If it does bother you then maybe you should use the "watermarks".

Archive

12-31-2006, 07:52 PM

Posted By: leonJC- I think you are right on target.....I always want to help but don't want scans or photo's of my cards used in a "for pay" way. I have said this many times...and recently too. regards

Archive

12-31-2006, 08:03 PM

Posted By: Bobby BinderLeon, You know that all images on my site are accessable to anyone and there is no fee being charged to view them. You gave me permission several times to use the images on your site but I have not simply because the scans are to small for me to use. I have gotten most of my images from people like Griffins, BcD and other members that helped out the site. I have always offered to give them a credit such as "Image donated by member XYZ". And there are some people that have asked for it but most have declined. Any person that want to help in adding images to the site would be appreciated and if they want a credit line them that is not a problem. Last week I posted need help for M101-5 and M101-4 images and a number of people responded sending me scans. My site offers a lot of free features such as player card searches, set searches, Want List notifications, My Collection and more. The only fee involved is to see the price results.

Archive

12-31-2006, 08:03 PM

Posted By: robert aThe biggest problem obviously is when your image is being used on a fraudulent website or ebay auction. When it comes to informational websites, studies, books, etc., I wouldn't mind at all. Not so sure where I stand on for-profit businesses taking my images for their own sites, but to a certain extent when you "publish" something to the web, it becomes public domain. Also, you can't always know if permission was granted to use the image when the card/photo was in someone else's collection. If it were me, I would ask permission. Robert

Archive

12-31-2006, 08:04 PM

Posted By: leonYou don't need to get defensive. I didn't say anything about you or your site and you have always done as I have asked with these situations. No worries....and happy holidays...

Archive

12-31-2006, 08:06 PM

Posted By: Jim ClarkeYes Dan, that is an option. However, this card industry is still pretty small where everyone (extremist like us) know everyone. Plus you can make other watermarks go over marks where you can't tell... I have a graphic artist that would amaze you... Leon, You would be in the same boat... When I ran my Ad in Oldcardboard, I asked you ahead of time if I could promote the board and use your 4BH Kelly. You said yes. I would think this curiously would apply anywhere. Wonder how many images SCD is using of our cards and what the annual sales are with them. At least they have credits in the front of the book which mentions many people, plus they probably have permission from most I would imagine. What is the difference in someone stealing your image and selling it as theirs on Ebay or a money making company using your scans to better their image and site.

Archive

12-31-2006, 08:07 PM

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)JC, First of all, you're blessed to have such a dilema. If people are using images from your web site it basically is a compliment with regard to your collection. With that said, I suppose it would be nice to have people ask permission before using the images. I can't imagine that there is much profit/money to be made off of articles on baseball cards or the hobby in general. Perhaps I'm naive. Now, if people were using images to promote their own website in an effort to make a profit from the hobby, then I'd be a bit unhappy about the situation and I'd ask the person to not use the image for that purpose. Feel lucky that you are in such a position because it means that people admire your collection. I for one am one of those people! Everyone, have a Happy New Year and be thankful for what we each have. Some of us don't have much be we appreciate what we do have. I would like to thank everyone that shares their collection with the collecting community. It makes this hobby that much more enjoyable.

Archive

12-31-2006, 08:12 PM

Posted By: Bobby BinderLeon, I am sorry to be defensive but Mr. Clark emailed me privately and accussed me of using his images with out permission. That is not how I operate and have always asked like I did at the National to scan in cards for the website. Most of the images from the site have been given to me by collectors and members. And or they where cards that I owned at one time or another.

Archive

12-31-2006, 08:14 PM

Posted By: Jim ClarkeA great example popped into my head.. When Lyman and Brett did a poster of cards. They asked me ahead of time and sent me 2 free ones after it was done. I know they sold them, but who cares.. I was happy. Again, I do not mind an infomational site to use images, but even then.. I want to be ASKED.. It's a respect thing... I do NOT want o find it out myself.

Archive

12-31-2006, 08:25 PM

Posted By: Jim ClarkeWell Bobby.. Now that you want to mention names here, that sorda taint this thread. We can go a little further. I can CLEARLY show you my images with the GREEN backgound I used to use on my images. They were NOT BOUGHT IN PUBLIC AUCTION as that is always a good defense. You said most have permission and that is great.. Many issues you have are popular with collectors and I'm sure they would want you to use their images. I just don't like that fact that you went on my site and TOOK my images to use on YOUR website.. JUST ASK! This thread was just to see every's opinion on this matter without it becoming a debate. I even told you I would post about it, so you can see people's thought. I do not collect much or follow graded cards, so I have not been to your site before until tonight. I do know, that your competition "Ted" ask me a year or two ago about using certain images and I said OK.... I think educating people on cards is GREAT for the hobby and will only help move this industry in a positive way.. However, try taking an image from Chad, Jay, Keith, Richard...or anyone else like that without asking... I'm sure they would NOT like it. (By the way, they are all in a league of their own)

Archive

12-31-2006, 08:25 PM

Posted By: Eric BHere are some things to consider. Do you ever own an electronic scan? Do you need to stop using a scan of your own card when you sell it? When you buy a card, did you ask if you were buying the scan rights too? If you give permission, then sell the card, do you need to tell everyone to stop using the scan? Do you need to give the current owner of a card credit for a scan you received permission to use from a previous owner? How do you track that? Personally, I don't think anyone owns the right to a scan for any card in their possession.

Archive

12-31-2006, 08:29 PM

Posted By: Ryan ChristoffThere is an entire website that deals the particular niche that I deal in and it is made up almost entirely of images either stolen from my auctions or ones I freely e-mailed years ago. I believe credit was given on maybe one or two. More annoying than that is when this person bought a group of magazines from me, then scanned all the images they needed, then returned them to me for a refund saying they were no longer interested in them. I felt great seeing those images all over his website. Yes, I did refund his money, by the way. It was our last transaction. -Ryan

Archive

12-31-2006, 09:38 PM

Posted By: Frank WakefieldI think Jim is right... a little "asking" can go a long way. It's the right way to do it. Frank.

Archive

12-31-2006, 09:42 PM

Posted By: warshawlawYou may not have the rights you think you do to the images in question. My understanding is that an image of a previously copyrighted work is not necessarily something you can protect. I also believe that there are certain uses that are allowed without the permission of the image holder under the fair use doctrine. Whether there is a financial gain is not the determinative test. It is a very complex area of law recently further qualified in certain appellate decisions. Certain information also cannot be copyright protected, such as facts.

Archive

12-31-2006, 09:51 PM

Posted By: Eric bAdding to that last comment. The only person/company that could possibly hold the copyright is the manufacturer. So did anyone ask the rights-holders of the survivor to American Tobacco Co. for the right to publish pictures of their T and N cards? If it's not public domain, only they can give permission.

Archive

12-31-2006, 10:07 PM

Posted By: Jim ClarkeAll good points. I really do not want to get into what is legal issue here. The only one who wins is the "attourney for which I am not" I just wanted thoughts on this issue. I know it's hard to give credit to everyone, then if the original owner sold the item pictured, it would be impossible to keep up with who gets credit for what. I do see why many people like to keep their collection private. It just bothers me a little when I see money involved. I'm sure I'll be over it by next year! JC

Archive

12-31-2006, 10:16 PM

Posted By: BrettIf you put your pictures on the internet, people shouldn't have to get your permission to use them, considering millions of people probably look at them. If you didn't want people to take your photos, then you wouldn't put them on the internet <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

12-31-2006, 10:22 PM

Posted By: leonThey don't "have" to ask permission, though I don't profess to know the law. It's a respect thing. It goes a long way in the hobby. I had a very nice, unique card, and sold it. I asked the buyer if I could continue using it on the front page of my website. He said no problem. If he would have said he would prefer me not to, then I wouldn't have done it. I even owned the card for several months when I started using it. Like Frank said, "asking can go a long way"..Also, just because I have my cards scanned on a website doesn't mean I want someone stealing the scans and then profiting from them. Again, no idea of the legality of that, but I guess if I had to I could find out......regards

Archive

12-31-2006, 11:37 PM

Posted By: RC McKenzieFor example, the Bill Donovan postcard that you won the other day has the wording on the front.."copyright by Fred G. Wright". It would seem that the Wright family heirs have the 'ownership' of that image. take care

Archive

01-01-2007, 12:12 AM

Posted By: Ryan ChristoffLeon is exactly right. It's not really a legal issue. There may be one, but that's not the real issue. At least not for me. It's about common courtesy and respect. It might be legal for me to steal your scans and use them in some way that makes me money, but that doesn't make it right. I am often asked for permission to use images on my website and without exception I have said yes. Usually, I will e-mail the person who asked many other images on the topic they are searching for that I have not put on my site. They never would have had access to these additional images had they simply taken the images on the site without asking. -Ryan

Archive

01-01-2007, 02:15 AM

Posted By: RC McKenzieFor example, if Jim or anyone else, receives the postcard of Donovan in the mail, places a green construction paper background along with his card on his scanner, makes a copy, and publishes that image to his website, then I agree that the Donovan image with the green background is 'his' image and folks should ask if they can use his image of the Donovan card. I disagree that once he purchases the card that all prior or future images of the same Donovan card are his belongings. Regards

Archive

01-01-2007, 05:52 AM

Posted By: JoannWe need to distinguisy between a legal/technical issue - which isn't what this thread is about - and a question about human courtesy. The old saying "Just because you can doesn't mean you should" applies here. No one's asking about whether the scans CAN be used, so I'm not really sure why people are defending that they CAN. The question is SHOULD - and the human courtesies that go with it. As to the for-profit thing, I think that even where scans generate profit indirectly a courtesy request is a must, especially if it is a unique image or a few taken from a place that has a large collection of superior images (like JC's or Leon's sites). Even if no one is directly charging money to view scans, if a site is using scans to increase or generate traffic to a for-profit site they should ask about using scans. It's the same if scans are used to try to sell calendars or books or anything else that isn't the actual scan itself. Believe me, I am a big fan of making these images available and am on cardpricer all the time just to look up cards - image banks are extremely helpful and I really appreciate that people go through the trouble to make them available. I guess I always just assumed that the images came from one of the founders or a friend or permission was obtained if from an unrelated private collector. It didn't really occur to me that the site wouldn't ask about using scans. Just my opinion. Now I'm going to sit back and wait for requests to roll in to use scans of my M116 Moriarty G/VG. lol Joann Edited to sound less directed at anyone.

Archive

01-01-2007, 06:13 AM

Posted By: barrysloateIf someone makes a profit from someone else's photograph, the owner should be compensated, however small. A good friend of mine runs a picture archive and sells photographs to authors who need them for books they are writing. If one is used that was originally taken from my collection, no matter how many years ago, he will send me a check for $25 or more. Not a large sum of money, but the appropriate way to do it. Nobody should profit from somebody else without offering some form of compensation.

Archive

01-01-2007, 06:44 AM

Posted By: Matt E.<img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1167576013.JPG"> Disable Right Click. I believe most websites have this function. Helps prevent guests from saving by clicking "Save Picture As...". See..I just stole this image of a mouse to make my point. I paid $24 for one year for my basic website and it has this feature. But as we know there are thousands upon thousands of places to get scans. In reality the copied image will last much longer on the web than the time we actually own the card. Saved in some file somewhere....to be used over and over again. Could lead to a new thread....SHOW US YOUR CYBER CARD COLLECTION.

Archive

01-01-2007, 06:49 AM

Posted By: Tom Boblitteven with right-click disabled. We had a thread discussing stealing photos and how to get around right click before I think. I definitely agree with JC that before someone does something that's a money-making venture, they should get a person's permission and possibly even 'cut them in' on the venture. Not sure what the legal ramificiations of 'stealing' photos is and I kind of agree with someone who said earlier if you 'own' the photo. Watermarking helps somewhat but that's cumbersome with tons of photos.....

Archive

01-01-2007, 08:14 AM

Posted By: RichardThough I don't recall the thread Tom mentions above, he's exactly right. At the end of the day, if somebody wants to steal images from a web site, there is no way whatsoever of stopping them. If you want to protect your images, then watermarking is probably the best bang for your buck. I think it will detour most people, and for those that insist on stealing it anyway, then for what it's worth, they will at least have to waste a lot of time cleaning it up. Regards, Richard.

Archive

01-01-2007, 10:21 AM

Posted By: Jim ClarkeRc, on the Donovan card that was won on Ebay. I would think that after the postcard was purchased in 1908,that the new owner could do anything they wanted with it... Mail it, tack it on the wall, sell it, or even post it on the e-net. If I bought a new car from Ford and drove it around for awhile, and then decided to sell it. Would I have to get permission from Ford first to promote my sale? Would they get a part of my proceeds? Another issue here. If someone has a high profile card that newly gets graded by one of the BIG 3 grading companies. Does the grading company have a right to profit on the cards image by selling it to another company??? Since I have never gone thru the grading process, I do not know if there a waiver form you sign? I have a couple of cards that are not in the big book and are un-cataloged. I do not want them to be published. I would think people like Frank and Leon have many cards like this that have more value to them being a question mark to people rather then being another card in a set to check off the list.... JC

Archive

01-01-2007, 10:31 AM

Posted By: Cobby33I agree with Fred, as I am not one of the fortunate ones who would have scans of their cards used on other sites. I also agree with Adam- legally, it's not the card owner's likeness or intellectual property, so I see no legal dilemma there.

Archive

01-01-2007, 10:39 AM

Posted By: warshawlawWhen it comes to cards my feeling is the more info out there the better. After all, if you own the card and it is rare or even unique, it is kind of like a movie star--any publicity is good for the ultimate value of your stuff. The T206 Wagner is the biggest card around even though it is not close to the rarest because of the publicity.

Archive

01-01-2007, 12:08 PM

Posted By: CatI don't care if people use my scans, but I don't have tremendously rare stuff. I did have one of my scans ('14 CJ Jackson) show up on EBay as a scam, and of course that upset me. Also, a board member (I believe it was Ryan) mentioned going through some hoops to ship a magazine only to have the person scan the images they needed and return the magazine for a refund. That type of action would really piss me off.

Archive

01-01-2007, 02:03 PM

Posted By: davidcyclebackThe owner of an early baseball card or photo no more owns the rights to the image than someone who doesn't own it. However, it's best to ask and to give credit. My guess is that the majority don't mind their images being used but would like to be asked to be asked ('a girl likes to be asked') and to get credit in the article or whatever-- which seems like a fair exchange. If it's reproduction of an entire article or blog, then unauthorized and uncredited reproduction would be illegal, as the writing is copyrighted to the author. For quoting a blurb or quote or paragraph from Beckett or whatever, then giving credit should suffice. Now, for a big time book or magazine publisher doing a book on old cards, they may pay you $$ for providing them high quality scans of images the need. Irrelevant to the copyrights, they are paying you for the service of finding, scanning and forewarding digital images. I've had photos published in books, and even in a documentary, and it was always a matter of the editor or publisher contacting me to see if I could get images of Red Sox stadium or photos by a photographer. So a New York publisher would tell this thread that someone who can provide images for your magazine or book or pay website is providing a real service that at least should be recognized.