Photography and the Law: Who Owns the Copyright?

I presumed it was to do with your comment about linking to the articles possibly breaching copyright ?
 
I presumed it was to do with your comment about linking to the articles possibly breaching copyright ?
Interesting! Let us ruminate over this one:
You are granting us with a non-exclusive, permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license to use, publish, or re-publish your Content in connection with the Service. You retain copyright over the Content.
Rules & Terms
Apparently, I retain copyright of the contents of my post. So gracious of the forum.
But the forum can do anything on the planet with it? Anything? Fair use does not apply? No permission or my consent needed?
 
In your first post (which you have since deleted but Google cached) you quoted 3 out of 4 paragraphs of the Slate article (261 of the 371 words or 70% of the content of the article).

Then you quoted the entire content of the article from The Guardian - all 246 words.

You didn't quote as much of the Photo Attorney pages but it could still be beyond Fair Use.
Of course you may have contacted all the rights owners and obtained their permisson and I'm not a qualified copyright lawyer which is why I said "might be a copyright infringement"

As your thread is about copyright it seems ironic to me that you were using other people's work in one case in its entirety to illustrate your point.
 
Interesting! Let us ruminate over this one:
You are granting us with a non-exclusive, permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license to use, publish, or re-publish your Content in connection with the Service. You retain copyright over the Content.
Rules & Terms
Apparently, I retain copyright of the contents of my post. So gracious of the forum.
But the forum can do anything on the planet with it? Anything? Fair use does not apply? No permission or my consent needed?
Are you seriously suggesting that by posting a comment which is mostly copy/pasting from 3 other sources you have obtained copyright for that content and should have some control over it's use?
I suggest you google "derivative works" Derivative work - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We both agreed to the rules of this forum by signing up, I'm happy for AVF to use my words according to those rules. If you're not then it seems obvious to me what course of action there is open to you.

As this thread has now become even weirder than it was when I posted my earlier comment I think I'll bow out at this point rather than keep addressing the weirdness :thumbsup:
 
Interesting! Let us ruminate over this one:
You are granting us with a non-exclusive, permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license to use, publish, or re-publish your Content in connection with the Service. You retain copyright over the Content.
Rules & Terms
Apparently, I retain copyright of the contents of my post. So gracious of the forum.
But the forum can do anything on the planet with it? Anything? Fair use does not apply? No permission or my consent needed?

Lets Not Bother.... :rolleyes:
 
5b7e0fdd39178dc8d4148618607fc96fb8908a1ea62c04119630f50f349c4ce1.jpg
 
Have restored Gkola's petulantly deleted first post.
Trashing a thread by deleting your post should be against the rules, but it happens so rarely that it's not worth adding.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom