All Forum Comments
Comment by bretti_kivi posted on Copyright at 11/01/2010 - 13:47
I take a photo of (part of) a 3-series BMW.
I cannot use the photo in a calendar for profit without requesting the permission of BMW, as the form of the car is copyright.
I *can* use the photo in a calendar that's mine, just mine. Their vehicle, my interpretation, no money involved. Personal and private use, "fair usage".
...allow limited private and educational use.
I could, maybe, use the photo in a calendar for a non-profit organisation, provided the photographers are listed and the organisation itself has permission from BMW (for example, most owner's clubs are organised so that they are tolerated by the manufacturer and thus are allowed to do this kind of thing).
Tourists taking photos of the Eiffel Tower could only be accused of infringement in my interpretation if they were selling the images on. Then they would need to apply for permission, but otherwise the images are for personal and private use and so different rules apply.
If Jack Smith takes the initial photo and cleans it up, the copyright probably still lies with Rob Jones, who took it.
However, if Jay Robinson then picks it up and dumps it on worth1000 as part of a larger collage, he's not necessarily legal, but you're not going to get anywhere with arguments as there's no money to be found.
My own photos on 23hq do not have creative commons licences, they are mine and I expect to be asked if someone wants to use one (which they have and do).
At this point I'll also add in that I've had to look into this because we've printed several calendars and a complete 88-page book for the A2 club in Germany. People's rights, copyright, picture issues and such like were researched thoroughly before printing and even then there's a nice big disclaimer at the back.
Bret
Comment by bretti_kivi posted on Copyright at 11/01/2010 - 12:39
You could argue (possibly successfully) that a landmark is "in the public interest", but at least on the car side it's pretty watertight on a pan-european level.
Bret
Comment by bretti_kivi posted on Copyright at 11/01/2010 - 10:55
Bret
Comment by bretti_kivi posted on weather in your local area tonight. at 11/01/2010 - 09:31
Bret
Comment by bretti_kivi posted on K-x Battery Capacity (Study case: Mahapowerex 2700mAh) at 10/01/2010 - 21:35
What, though are the usable alternatives, especially where you need a hotshoe?
Skyports?
Bret
Comment by bretti_kivi posted on First play off camera flashguns - what am I doing wrong? at 10/01/2010 - 20:42
User Audience is the only important thing here: international, young / old, tech / non-tech.
Bret
Comment by bretti_kivi posted on A question about online forums (nothing to do with photography) at 10/01/2010 - 20:32
Charge fully, re-test. You should get slightly better life from the 2700s, but the eneloops will hold their charge for a *very* long time (>3years!)
Bret
Comment by bretti_kivi posted on K-x Battery Capacity (Study case: Mahapowerex 2700mAh) at 10/01/2010 - 20:29
try also timescapes.org or the "kuroshio sea" vimeo vid to see just what HD video can do in the right hands.
Bret
Comment by bretti_kivi posted on K7 HD Video at 10/01/2010 - 17:08
Bret
Comment by bretti_kivi posted on Trying to choose a tripod at 10/01/2010 - 11:07


TBH, I'm not going to push it as far as a car manufacturer is concerned. It's not worth it.
I'm also not worried whether it's UK case law or not, as the reality says I need to worry about copyright protection where my images have been used, so that could be anywhere. European law differs mildly from country to country but anyone prosecuting will want to do it where the laws are in their favour. My personal interpretation also says "you are profiting from the work of another and therefore royalties are payable" when photographing vehicles.
Bret