View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 16497 Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 4:11 pm Post subject: Nikon 2.8/6mm for EUR300 |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
Well, that cost me showing a picture of that Nikon 2.8/6mm lens WITH copyright mentioned, but got sued by the real owner of that for copyright violation (as I did not know it was someones elses work...)
Lesson learnt I guess...
Don't get me wrong here: I did something wrong, but without knowing it. I'm always very careful about the copyright laws, also in forums I moderate like here, as it has gotten "so common" to show pictures found on the net.
So take this as what it was intended for: a WARNING TO TAKE COPYRIGHT LAWS SERIOUS!!
Also since I work professionally, quite a few of my works have need stolen or used w/o my permission, but for me it makes no sense to go after that - not worth it, actually it is free advertisement _________________ Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7547 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
I though you won a 2.8/6mm for EUR 300 when i see the title.....
When in doubt, the hyperlink only instead of post the photo directly. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ultrapix
Joined: 06 Jan 2012 Posts: 547 Location: Italy
|
Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 5:38 pm Post subject: Re: Nikon 2.8/6mm for EUR300 |
|
|
Ultrapix wrote:
kds315* wrote: |
Well, that cost me showing a picture of that Nikon 2.8/6mm lens WITH copyright mentioned, but got sued by the real owner of that for copyright violation (as I did not know it was someones elses work...)
Lesson learnt I guess...
Don't get me wrong here: I did something wrong, but without knowing it. I'm always very careful about the copyright laws, also in forums I moderate like here, as it has gotten "so common" to show pictures found on the net.
So take this as what it was intended for: a WARNING TO TAKE COPYRIGHT LAWS SERIOUS!!
Also since I work professionally, quite a few of my works have need stolen or used w/o my permission, but for me it makes no sense to go after that - not worth it, actually it is free advertisement |
I don't know what the photo you shared was like, but the image of an industrial product can be protected by copyright law only if it contains elements of subjective and artistic interpretation, while in the case of a didactic image, with no character of authorship, a judge would hardly have recognized a compensation of that amount, especially if the use you made of it was not for profit. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10462 Location: California
Expire: 2021-06-22
|
Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
I was also confused!
To be clear, here's what I understand:
Yes, it is illegal to upload copyrighted material not yours, but perfectly legal "fair use" to quote a linked image given attribution.
It's done all the time here, from using copyrighted images posted here in a quoted reply, to displaying via link a copyright image on another web site given attribution. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony A7Rii, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200
Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300
Macro-Takumar 1:4/50
Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm
Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element),
Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17
Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500
Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100
Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100
SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
Other lenses:
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 2901 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
There are people making a living of suing people for using their work. They even publish as many pictures as possible that are likely to be used. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3749 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 6:01 pm Post subject: Re: Nikon 2.8/6mm for EUR300 |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Ultrapix wrote: |
kds315* wrote: |
Well, that cost me showing a picture of that Nikon 2.8/6mm lens WITH copyright mentioned, but got sued by the real owner of that for copyright violation (as I did not know it was someones elses work...)
Lesson learnt I guess...
Don't get me wrong here: I did something wrong, but without knowing it. I'm always very careful about the copyright laws, also in forums I moderate like here, as it has gotten "so common" to show pictures found on the net.
So take this as what it was intended for: a WARNING TO TAKE COPYRIGHT LAWS SERIOUS!!
Also since I work professionally, quite a few of my works have need stolen or used w/o my permission, but for me it makes no sense to go after that - not worth it, actually it is free advertisement |
I don't know what the photo you shared was like, but the image of an industrial product can be protected by copyright law only if it contains elements of subjective and artistic interpretation, while in the case of a didactic image, with no character of authorship, a judge would hardly have recognized a compensation of that amount, especially if the use you made of it was not for profit. |
Interesting information - thank you for sharing!
I knew some German lawyer are crazy concerning "Abmahnungen" and similar stuff - some years ago, these subjects regularly tried to make money also in Switzerland, but since our laws are different, they rarely succeeded. It even happened that they (knowing they couldn't get money by regular enforcement!) would hire some nasty guy from eastern Europe ... These guys then would ring at your door and threaten you physically. However they weren't prepared for the local Swiss police which - without further ado - did arrest them ... Probably lessons learned as well! Happened a few years ago in the Nidwalden canton ...
S
PS was it someone from Germany or from abroad? _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
blotafton
Joined: 08 Aug 2013 Posts: 1534 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
blotafton wrote:
Where was that image shown? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 16497 Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
Well, to make things clear, it showed a german Photographer from Hamburg, holding that Nikkor 2.8/6mm mounted on his Nikon camera while standing on a ladder, looking as if it was taken in a mirror (which was that confused me) but taken by that other photographer, who had me sued...
So either it was this "Abmahnungen" trick which some lawyers were specializing on, as it was quick and simple to make money, or really just someone who was upset that his image was used without permission (which I would understand). _________________ Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Teemō
Joined: 07 Apr 2016 Posts: 586 Location: Australia
|
Posted: Fri Aug 14, 2020 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Teemō wrote:
Wow, that is ludicrous! I didn't see the image (I'm guessing you shared it somewhere here, and that it was from an auction), but the problem with linking to auctions etc. is that eventually the images are removed - sometimes whole websites (particularly if they are personal blogs) are shut down without warning over time. If it was just an image from eBay, I question what authority they (eBay) or the seller really have over any notion of copyright of a generic product, shared in a non-commercial way. There are quite a few auction archive sites that pay eBay to use their API to take the images of auctions and other information, and offer these for sale to interested collectors well and truly after the auction listing has expired.
Anyway, I am only left with more questions. Since this is a website and there is an owner and other individuals (moderators etc.) behind it, I wouldn't wish to bring any legal trouble even if it is unjustified and frivolous at best.
I guess the only suggestion is hosting this website in a country with strong, robust privacy and legal protections over fair use and copyright. Then threats like this can be safely ignored in future, and one won't have to worry about their personal identity being shared with the plaintiff by the hosting company. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3749 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Teemō wrote: |
Wow, that is ludicrous! |
Yep - but things like this do happen. Not very often, and therefore nothing to really worry about.
Teemō wrote: |
Anyway, I am only left with more questions. Since this is a website and there is an owner and other individuals (moderators etc.) behind it, I wouldn't wish to bring any legal trouble even if it is unjustified and frivolous at best. |
That's why i am only publishing images i have taken myself here on mflenses.com.
Teemō wrote: |
I guess the only suggestion is hosting this website in a country with strong, robust privacy and legal protections over fair use and copyright. Then threats like this can be safely ignored in future, and one won't have to worry about their personal identity being shared with the plaintiff by the hosting company. |
Such as Switzerland?!? (just joking!!)
To make it clear: The copyright for photographers here in Switzerland is very weak; anyone can copy and use my images for free unless i can prove to the judge that my image has an unique cultural/artistic value (i. e. is regarded as art). Very difficult to prove indeed. On the other hand, surprisingly, if my work is considered as art, i'm free to show nearly anyone on my images (e. g. street photography, which always legally and morally is a difficult subject). I have published such images, not too often, but only once I got a reaction: The person shown was really delighted with the image and asked me to get a hard copy. Which of course was granted . Usually, after taking such an image, I start chatting with the people; that makes it easy to judge if they were OK with me having taken images. But of course that's not always possible ...
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aidaho
Joined: 29 Apr 2018 Posts: 456 Location: Ukraine
|
Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2020 10:12 am Post subject: Re: Nikon 2.8/6mm for EUR300 |
|
|
aidaho wrote:
kds315* wrote: |
Well, that cost me showing a picture of that Nikon 2.8/6mm lens WITH copyright mentioned, but got sued by the real owner of that for copyright violation (as I did not know it was someones elses work...) |
Wow. Sounds perplexing to me.
Can you share a full story on how this came to be?
My understanding is you've shared someone else's publicly available photo with attribution on your website for non-commercial purposes?
Have you really been sued and had to go to court over this? Can you link a public court ruling (I assume German courts have to publish depersonalized rulings online?) for us to read?
Or was it an out of court settlement?
Anyway, you have my sympathies.
From the details you've provided the outcome sounds ridiculous to me.
I think this crosses the line of the rights protection straight to the extortion. _________________ https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10462 Location: California
Expire: 2021-06-22
|
Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2020 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
As I understand a copyrighted image was downloaded, i.e. copied, then the copy was uploaded and shown on another web site. Downloading a copy is perfectly legal for private use. The uploaded copy violates copyright.
For example, I can download any of Klaus' copyrighted images. I can use one for my home computer wallpaper. I can print one and frame it for my living room wall. However, I cannot display the photo in public. I cannot sell the photo. I cannot upload the downloaded image, but I can show the image via a link to the original provided Klauss is given attribution. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony A7Rii, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200
Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300
Macro-Takumar 1:4/50
Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm
Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element),
Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17
Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500
Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100
Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100
SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
Other lenses:
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto
Last edited by visualopsins on Sun Aug 16, 2020 5:55 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014 Posts: 2913 Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2020 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
I don't publish and only post my own photos on this site. I did have one photo I posted on here show up on an Asian site. I was google searching for other images taken with the lens (pentax 67 55mm f4) when up pops one of my own shots with all the script in an Asian language. Since I had no idea if it was flattering or derogatory I just let it go. I assumed it was positive as it was one of my personal favorite shots. Copyright in the age of internet is a minefield. _________________ photos are moments frozen in time |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3749 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2020 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
However, I cannot display the photo in public. I cannot sell the photo. I cannot upload the downloaded image, but I can show the image via a link to the original provided Klauss is given attribution. |
It very much depends on in which country you live. Here in Switzerland it's perfectly legal to download, for example, an image and use it commercially for you own purposes, as long as the image downloaded doesn't have an intrinsic artistic value. An ordinary landscape photography, taken somewhere in Switzerland, is not regarded as having unique artistic value, and therefore not protected.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_Switzerland (scroll down for details on photography)
Stephan _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|