Jump to content
whoahorse

Stock Photos

Recommended Posts

Do you guys ever buy stock photos for use on your websites?

 

I bought my first one today. I searched and searched and I think if I would have just paid the 1.00 dollar to begin with I would have saved 5 hours of searching. LOL!

 

You can also sell your photos at these stock photo websites. What do you guys think of that? I am a bit nervous, I do charge more then 1.00 for my photos. LOL!

 

Any thoughts?

 

Weezy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you guys ever buy stock photos for use on your websites?

 

I bought my first one today.  I searched and searched and I think if I would have just paid the 1.00 dollar to begin with I would have saved 5 hours of searching.  LOL!

 

You can also sell your photos at these stock photo websites.  What do you guys think of that?  I am a bit nervous, I do charge more then 1.00 for my photos.  LOL!

 

Any thoughts?

 

Weezy

 

I have given this some thought. In fact I started setting up at one of the stock photo sites to post some of my pics but I never followed through. You do have some nice pictures. I am rather surprised that none of the whoahorse pages I have looked at have any copyright.

 

On a related note...how do you feel about this...

 

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&lr=l...com&btnG=Search

 

Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have given this some thought. In fact I started setting up at one of the stock photo sites to post some of my pics but I never followed through. You do have some nice pictures. I am rather surprised that none of the whoahorse pages I have looked at have any copyright.
Thanks for your nice comments!

 

Most of my sites have copyright on them.

 

On a related note...how do you feel about this...

 

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&lr=l...com&btnG=Search

 

Not sure how I feel as I have no idea what your question is. LOL

 

Weezy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for your nice comments!

 

Most of my sites have copyright on them.

 

On a related note...how do you feel about this...

 

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&lr=l...com&btnG=Search

 

Not sure how I feel as I have no idea what your question is. LOL

 

Weezy

 

OK...guess I need to be a bit more specific. Image searches like this are used by people looking for free pictures to use for web sites and such. Want a picture of a horse? Just do a google image search for "horse" and grab what you like from someone else's site. Many people now block referrals from google or yahoo image search because it is almost exclusively used for stealing pictures.

 

If there is no copyright notice, all the better. None of the pictures or pages I found on your site using google image search had any copyright notice at all. That puts them in the public domain, free for anyone to use. I was just wondering if that was what you intended or if that even bothers you. I know I have had to fight a few times to get my copyrighted articles and pictures removed from other people's sites.

 

Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the photos I have that I am concerned about I load at http://www.hoofprints.ca and they have my logo on them. For sure they do, have a looookie -

 

People have taken them and used them and its good advertising.

 

LOL

 

The ones you found belong to one of my web clients and if they were concerned about people using them they wouldn't allow me to load them. Watermarks and such help as well.

 

Weezy

Edited by whoahorse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a contract with an old fashioned stock photo agency for years. It's hard to get in, but it's real money if you sell.

 

I never checked out online agencies, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a contract with an old fashioned stock photo agency for years. It's hard to get in, but it's real money if you sell.

 

I never checked out online agencies, though.

 

Annie your photos are amazing!

 

I esp love this one that you took, great capture Annie!

 

jannich2.jpg

 

Weezy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If there is no copyright notice, all the better. None of the pictures or pages I found on your site using google image search had any copyright notice at all. That puts them in the public domain, free for anyone to use.

 

In the US, this is absolutely not true. All works are copyright protected, regardless of whether the symbol is there. Canadian copyright may be different, but my general understanding is that lack of copyright symbol does not in any way imply a work is in the public domain.

 

Just because people steal the pictures doesn't mean they had a right to. And if they want to steal pictures, a symbol at the bottom of the page isn't going to stop them. Ask the music industry about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If there is no copyright notice, all the better. None of the pictures or pages I found on your site using google image search had any copyright notice at all. That puts them in the public domain, free for anyone to use.

 

In the US, this is absolutely not true. All works are copyright protected, regardless of whether the symbol is there. Canadian copyright may be different, but my general understanding is that lack of copyright symbol does not in any way imply a work is in the public domain.

 

Just because people steal the pictures doesn't mean they had a right to. And if they want to steal pictures, a symbol at the bottom of the page isn't going to stop them. Ask the music industry about that.

 

I have heard several people lately state that all works are automatically copyrighted with or without a copyright notice. I'm not sure where that myth is coming from but that is absolutely not true. One of the most notorious cases of this is Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech. (http://www.rcfp.org/news/mag/24-1/bct-kingesta.html) The normal method of securing the copyright on a public speech is to distribute the speech to the press with a copyright notice prior to the event. MLK failed to do this and eventually his family ended up in a law suite with CBS over it.

 

It was eventually ruled that a public performance of a work was not the same as a general publication so King did not wave his right to copyright the speech under the U.S. copyright law of 1909. The key here is that, if it had been published without a copyright notice he would have lost his rights to it. The only way he retained his copyright was in the fact that public performance is not considered general publication. Posting on the internet certainly is and if you do so with any work without a copyright notice you forfeit all rights to that work.

 

Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have heard several people lately state that all works are automatically copyrighted with or without a copyright notice. I'm not sure where that myth is coming from but that is absolutely not true. One of the most notorious cases of this is Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech. (http://www.rcfp.org/news/mag/24-1/bct-kingesta.html) The normal method of securing the copyright on a public speech is to distribute the speech to the press with a copyright notice prior to the event. MLK failed to do this and eventually his family ended up in a law suite with CBS over it.

 

It was eventually ruled that a public performance of a work was not the same as a general publication so King did not wave his right to copyright the speech under the U.S. copyright law of 1909. The key here is that, if it had been published without a copyright notice he would have lost his rights to it. The only way he retained his copyright was in the fact that public performance is not considered general publication. Posting on the internet certainly is and if you do so with any work without a copyright notice you forfeit all rights to that work.

This is not a myth - it is current U.S. federal law. The case you cite had to look at copyright law as it was in 1963, because that's when MLK delivered his speech and shortly thereafter registered a copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office (under the Copyright Act of 1909). Copyright law has changed over the last 40+ years.

 

This is the current law per the U.S. Copyright Office:

NOTICE OF COPYRIGHT

 

The use of a copyright notice is no longer required under U. S. law, although it is often beneficial. Because prior law did contain such a requirement, however, the use of notice is still relevant to the copyright status of older works.

 

Notice was required under the 1976 Copyright Act. This requirement was eliminated when the United States adhered to the Berne Convention, effective March 1, 1989.

A copywritable work is protected by copyright as soon as the work is "fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device". (17 USC 102)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is not a myth - it is current U.S. federal law.  The case you cite had to look at copyright law as it was in 1963, because that's when MLK delivered his speech and shortly thereafter registered a copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office (under the Copyright Act of 1909).  Copyright law has changed over the last 40+ years.

 

Ok...I stand corrected. :D Although I think I will keep the copyright notice as they do recommend it to remove any defense of ignorance of copyright protection from infringers.

 

Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although I think I will keep the copyright notice as they do recommend it to remove any defense of ignorance of copyright protection from infringers.
Good point. No sense tempting folks to use your stuff wrongly. It's like a security company sticker on your front door... it makes the "casual criminal" think twice about it. The hardcores will go anyway but nothing will stop them.

 

If someone does abuse it then they may hear the judge say "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." :thumbup1:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, despite my earlier comment, there are definite benefits to having the copyright symbol on the page. I was irritated about something else entirely and I think it came out unintentionally in my post--sorry, that was way more confrontational than I meant it to be.

 

I think images are actually easier to protect than text, simply because they can be watermarked. And I like Weezy's comment about auto-advertising!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, despite my earlier comment, there are definite benefits to having the copyright symbol on the page. I was irritated about something else entirely and I think it came out unintentionally in my post--sorry, that was way more confrontational than I meant it to be.

 

I think images are actually easier to protect than text, simply because they can be watermarked. And I like Weezy's comment about auto-advertising!

 

Awww..thanks!

 

I did load some photos at one of those stock photo places but I have not heard back yet - yay or nay, it did say that it could take up to 40 hours for a decision. LOL

 

Weezy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was irritated about something else entirely and I think it came out unintentionally in my post--sorry, that was way more confrontational than I meant it to be.

 

Funny you should say that...I was feeling exactly the same about my response...and it's even worse when you are wrong :thumbup1:

 

 

Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's like a security company sticker on your front door... it makes the "casual criminal" think twice about it.  The hardcores will go anyway but nothing will stop them.

 

I have been rather amazed in watching my traffic that my error 403 page (http://www.verchi.com/403.shtml), with its stop sign notice that image theft is prohibited, is actually working. I have it set to come up whenever someone comes in through an image search...and no one ever goes past that page even though there is a link on it to my photography pages. I honestly expected at least some people to ignore it.

 

Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Don! I am pretty proud of myself. LOL!

 

Some of the photos I submitted got declined as well because they have way too many of them already.. ie.. butterflys. LOL

 

Weezy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome Weezy!!!

Keep submitting them - enough will get in to make you famous - or at least give you enough cash to buy some film for your digital camera :dance:

 

The money's not as cool as having them accept your photos though. Congrats!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awesome Weezy!!!

Keep submitting them - enough will get in to make you famous - or at least give you enough cash to buy some film for your digital camera :thumbup:

 

The money's not as cool as having them accept your photos though.  Congrats!

 

Totally JIM! I am just excited they thought my photo and scanning was up to snuff :D All the horsey photos I have and they take the woofie one. LOL!

 

Well done, Weezy. :P

 

Thanks Thomas! Your support is never ending!

 

Weezy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...