tfboy

A bit of a strange question, I guess, but wondered what people would think of the following.

I posted a little while ago a thread on SWMBO and my hot-air ballooning holiday in Italy. It was great of course - loads of photos here if you missed them first time.

Anyway, one of the chaps out there was showing his client's balloon as a marketing stunt which was well covered on the beeb. Naturally, loads of people took loads of photos but I probably had one of the better ones of his balloon. I stayed in touch with the pilot and he asked me for a copy of the photo. Initially, I sent him a low resolution, watermarked version as I had heard rumours that he has been known to "annoy people and rip them off". But with my best intention, I clearly stated in email communication that I had no problem providing a high res non-watermarked version as long as I was credited if ever it were to be published.

Having a casual browse on the net, I wondered over to the client's website to find a crop and distorted and photoshopped version of his balloon which I'm 99% sure originated from my photo. There's no mention whatsoever of me, nor my involvement.

I don't want to get arsey about this, but it was agreed in writing that I would be credited. The pilot didn't email me either to ask further or to mention it, despite me asking him to keep me informed if ever my photo was used.

So, what would you do? I'm tempted just to send an invoice to the end client for a couple of hundred quid and see what happens.

I suppose there's no way I can undeniably prove from my end that the photo was originally mine, and I'd want to have a certain degree of certainty before I push...

thoughts please.

Thanks

__________________
Xavier

bengie

burn his house down.

theft is theft.

__________________
owner of a skoda octavia 4xvrs3

Dr Zoidberg

Invoice him for the photo.
There are standard rates for these sort of things , and urbex'ers quite often get paydays when local papers steal their photos (usually while slagging them off)

__________________
Alex

"I laugh in the face of danger, then I hide until it goes away"

www.drzoidberg.co.uk

Babs

The EXIF info in the picture, possibly?

F*ck him up though!

__________________

Neo_VR

Its not as if youve lost anything? you dont take pictures for living, you take pictures for a hobby.

I would contact him and ask wtf hes up to but nothin more

__________________
ColGod the UberMod


,___,
[O.o]
/)__)
-"--"- ORLY??

tfboy

I'll have a look on 28DL, but any idea what the going rate is?

It's not that I want money out of it, but an agreement was made, which has now been broken. And I don't think it's right that "they shuld get away with it". I don't know who's at fault here. Either the chap didn't tell the company he was doing the stuff for and they're unknowingly used my photo without being aware of the need to credit / ask.

Or they did know and not think anymore about it.

Either way, they make £1000s all the time, so it's not the £200 I'd ask for that would bother them. It's just the principle of having stuff stolen.

There's no exif in the photo. But they didn't change the whole filename. Imaging you sent them NeoVRoctylarge.jpg and the website now has NeoVRocty_crop.jpg. Highly circumstantial, don't you think?

__________________
Xavier

Dr Zoidberg

There was a link on either there or Derelict Places in the last couple of weeks that had a whole table of rates depending on the place in which it was used.

For local newspapers it's about 70 quid a go for incidental photos

__________________
Alex

"I laugh in the face of danger, then I hide until it goes away"

www.drzoidberg.co.uk

Dr Zoidberg

__________________
Alex

"I laugh in the face of danger, then I hide until it goes away"

www.drzoidberg.co.uk

tfboy

Cheers Alex.

AFAIK, this is only online, but who knows - I haven't searched for printed published material. The agreement was that the pic could be used on their website providing credit was given for the source of the photo (which it wasn't). I had asked for a link which I never received (but worked it out from the email address ). Also, some thank-you gesture was in order, but haven't received anything either - I did hear beer mentioned which is always nice

edit: turning my brain on for two seconds, it's clear that it's intentional as the photo is on his website, not the "client's".

__________________
Xavier

bengie

out of interest if its not about the money then why bother? why not be happy that they liked your picture enough to use it to front their company?

__________________
owner of a skoda octavia 4xvrs3

mathepac

Because it is blatant plagiarism, which is immoral, unethical and illegal - copyright theft, intellectual property rights infringement and exploitation of someone else's unattributed work for (possibly) commercial gain.

An acquaintance is currently pursuing a government agency over theft of 25-pages worth of content from a doctoral dissertation which was copied and pasted into a high-level report and not authorised nor was it attributed.

If OP is correct and it is his work that has been reproduced, then he is entitled to two and possibly three thing -

1) Recognition amd attribution
2) Payment of a royalty
3) Damages for theft

1 and 2 are not mutually exclusive. In other words attribution only does not exclude the necessity for payment (unless the author waives this right) and payment of a royalty does not exclude the need for attribution.

__________________
SKN Stage 1 Remap, 175 / 325, KW V1's, 17" Audi TT Comps & Toyo Proxes, JabbaSport RARB, Cage Mod, Pikey Arch Vent Mod, PD160, K&N Panel Filter, Milltek turbo-back exhaust, 312 mm brakes, Mintex X1's, Osram Night Breakers, Seat Surgeons Leather, Bosch Aero Wipers, brisky sticker & number plate surrounds, 'Ring sticker, SRE Organic Clutch, Sachs DMF, release bearing, cam-belt, tensioner & idler, water-pump, G12+, aux belt & tensioner, engine mount bolts. Turbo Dynamics PD150 Hybrid, Forge FMIC, Allard Race Pipe, CCV catch Can

bengie

i think that 1 possible picture and 25 pages of a dissertation are slightly different things.

__________________
owner of a skoda octavia 4xvrs3

oilburninnut

from an ethical point of view,i think its exactly the same thing tho.

__________________
Gary
www.dogboxmedia.co.uk

bengie

ethically yes but in reality they are a world apart. one took many hours work/knowledge/effort and learning to pull off where the other any chimp could get with a lucky shot(not saying xav is a chimp nor got a lucky shot but anyone can get a good picture).

__________________
owner of a skoda octavia 4xvrs3

Kaiserb_uk

I'm not sure that house burning is the standard punishment for theft, and boy do you change your tune quick?

It clearly isn't about the money, and it needn't be. It's not much to ask to be credited, and when you're not then you have cause for complaint. And shrugging your shoulders and saying "oh well" is what we're supposed to do as decent british citizens.

I'd just ring the bloke and talk to him directly. If you approach it the right way he'll be more than likely to admit his mistake and apologise (and perhaps add to your beer fund). Much more likely to get a favourable result than snotty emails/solicitors, that sort of thing.

__________________
Offended? spEak You're bRanes


MCSA:M
CompTIA:Security+
Mods:Nearly enough

mathepac

As others have said, I think the principle is the same.

What tfboy (allegedly) had removed from him was the the right to choose between being credited as the author of the picture and / or getting paid for its use.

This is the bit that doesn't sit well with me. It sounds like his rights as the originator of a piece of work which other people find useful or attractive were trampled over and I believe he is entitled to some remedy for any wrong done to him, if in fact this is what happened.

How he might approach seeking a remedy is for him to decide (dirct approach, indirectly via a "legal-eagle", etc.)

__________________
SKN Stage 1 Remap, 175 / 325, KW V1's, 17" Audi TT Comps & Toyo Proxes, JabbaSport RARB, Cage Mod, Pikey Arch Vent Mod, PD160, K&N Panel Filter, Milltek turbo-back exhaust, 312 mm brakes, Mintex X1's, Osram Night Breakers, Seat Surgeons Leather, Bosch Aero Wipers, brisky sticker & number plate surrounds, 'Ring sticker, SRE Organic Clutch, Sachs DMF, release bearing, cam-belt, tensioner & idler, water-pump, G12+, aux belt & tensioner, engine mount bolts. Turbo Dynamics PD150 Hybrid, Forge FMIC, Allard Race Pipe, CCV catch Can

bengie

my first response is my initial comical reply but then when people start getting all snotty about it i take it more seriously, sorry.

__________________
owner of a skoda octavia 4xvrs3

tfboy

As others have said, I'm not in it "for the money".

What berates me more than anything else is that the chap who approached me is the "Operations Director".

To be clear, here's the original stuff
to which I replied
To which he kindly acknowledged
- I've not been informed how it has been used
- I've not been credited or had any mention on their website - small cropped version is on their front page
- I've not received anything in return

I don't want to get nasty, but when IMHO it's a blatent rip-off, especially considering the initial "thank you, don't worry, we'll make a mention" speech, it's a bit disheartening, considering it's coming from the manager.

__________________
Xavier

oilburninnut

i thought all posts here were suposed to be serious


i'm not being snotty about it mate,just trying to be objective

__________________
Gary
www.dogboxmedia.co.uk

bengie

that wasn't aimed at you ya gayer!

__________________
owner of a skoda octavia 4xvrs3

smstext

i reckon let us have his details and we all will contact him like we have many times before when others have crossed the path of the brisky family

__________________

Oxon Meet Feeler 2009 please add your input, click here

heresmo

It's very difficult to see what the facts are here, IMO.

For example, you took a picture, sent a low res then a higher res one. The received email says "we have a similar shot", but that's not really a fact as you wouldn't know if they did or not, nor is whether they did in fact use your shot since you think the shot used is not identical (your first post mentions "photoshopped").

I've no idea whether an original image which is changed still constitutes "yours", no longer being an original work. Nor was it copyright protected. I presume with copyrights, others are not allowed to distort one's images.

Sorry, more questions than answers.

My view would be to try to sort something out informally - and give up if they are experts at this game as they'll know all the tricks of the trade, which you possibly don't without incurring legal fees. Perhaps learn from the experience to ensure a better result for any possible future occasions.

You don't say whether you learned of hearsay about possible "rip off" intentions before or after this incident either. Beforehand, you wouldn't probably wouldn't have relied on friendly words, or if afterwards, then as said, it's once bitten twice shy.

No help at all I know - just how it runs though my brain.

Regards
Mo

__________________

Dr Zoidberg

Having seen the original and cropped images used on the website , they are most definitely Xav's pictures that they have used. There are people walking past in *exactly* the same place that wouldn't be there if it was a different photo.
If the source image was his then they are still copyright images that can't be used without consent , and trimming and / or distorting the picture doesn't change this.

As the consent was conditional on credit being given then which hasn't happened then this is an unauthorised use which he is entitled to payment for.

If they don't just cough up the money on receiving an invoice it's unlikely to be worth going to the small claims court to chase it though.

__________________
Alex

"I laugh in the face of danger, then I hide until it goes away"

www.drzoidberg.co.uk