Welcome to SP!  -
Areas & RangesMountains & RocksRoutesImagesArticlesTrip ReportsGearOtherPeoplePlans & PartnersWhat's NewForum

These guys have been really busy stealing photos from SP

Post general questions and discuss issues related to climbing.
 

Postby Diego Sahagún » Thu Oct 30, 2008 4:49 pm

Read its comment in the blog
User Avatar
Diego Sahagún

 
Posts: 14520
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2001 6:21 pm
Location: Madrid, Spain
Thanked: 590 times in 539 posts

Postby Rick B » Thu Oct 30, 2008 8:00 pm

The oeav site automatically puts a copyright notice on each picture that somebody posts. So you or I could easily create an account, upload some more of Nelson's gorgeous pictures, and it will automatically put a copyright notice over it.

Which is actually a good idea in principle of the oeav, but here it kind of backfires ..
User Avatar
Rick B

 
Posts: 937
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 4:41 pm
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Thanked: 14 times in 10 posts

Postby Michael Graupe » Mon Nov 03, 2008 11:55 pm

The issue with the OEAV got resolved. After sending a few e-mails, the photo was taken off the website as well as their newsletter, and they apologized sincerely to Nelson. I still think it is very sad and pathetic that such a reputable organization as the OEAV engages in such behaviour.
User Avatar
Michael Graupe

 
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 10:55 am
Location: Pacifica, California, United States
Thanked: 9 times in 8 posts

Postby Dave K » Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:34 am

Michael Graupe wrote:The issue with the OEAV got resolved. After sending a few e-mails, the photo was taken off the website as well as their newsletter, and they apologized sincerely to Nelson. I still think it is very sad and pathetic that such a reputable organization as the OEAV engages in such behaviour.


That's great, but yeah it is too bad it took so much prodding to get them to do the right thing.
User Avatar
Dave K
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 7935
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 2:40 pm
Location: Rancho Cordova, California, United States
Thanked: 77 times in 39 posts

Postby Corax » Tue Nov 04, 2008 12:13 pm

It's great to hear that case is finished and that it ended in a ..."positive way".
I'm getting more and more annoyed by the behavior within the scene. I think it's one thing (bad as well of course) if some individuals "borrow" a nice mountain photo, but when it's for example a national mountaineering organization, Peakware and other commercial sites which steal from other mountaineers it's really bad.

I think there may be a way to expose this rotten business for the masses. Or at least for a lot of the mountaineering & climbing world. I need some examples.

We have:
- OEAV
- Peakware (is your photo of Xixa still there Fred?)
- Another huge commercial montaineering site, I'd rather not mention by name at the moment.

Any others?
I need some more to go further.
User Avatar
Corax

 
Posts: 1241
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 12:13 pm
Thanked: 16 times in 8 posts

Postby Nelson » Tue Nov 04, 2008 1:38 pm

Michael Graupe wrote:The issue with the OEAV got resolved. After sending a few e-mails, the photo was taken off the website as well as their newsletter, and they apologized sincerely to Nelson. I still think it is very sad and pathetic that such a reputable organization as the OEAV engages in such behaviour.


A special thanks to Michael Graupe, an OEAV member who volunteered to send e-mails to different sections of the organization. Michael also found the newsletter where they had used the photo, something I was unaware of.

Hopefully the OEAV will be more careful in the future, and other photographers and climbers will not discover their work published without consent.
User Avatar
Nelson

 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 2:07 pm
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Postby Nelson » Tue Nov 04, 2008 1:43 pm

Corax wrote:I think there may be a way to expose this rotten business for the masses. Or at least for a lot of the mountaineering & climbing world. I need some examples.

We have:
- OEAV
- Peakware (is your photo of Xixa still there Fred?)
- Another huge commercial montaineering site, I'd rather not mention by name at the moment.


Regarding Peakware, I did find the same photo there as well. I contacted them and in about three days I received an apology and the photo was deleted.
User Avatar
Nelson

 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 2:07 pm
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Postby Buz Groshong » Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:35 pm

Nartreb wrote:

legal costs will be paid by the violator, if it comes to a court case


Not totally true; only if the copyright is registered with the US Copyright Office. According to the US Copyright Office "If registration is made within three months after publication of the work or prior to an infringement of the work, statutory damages and attorney’s fees will be available to the copyright owner in court actions. Otherwise, only an award of actual damages and profits is available to the copyright owner.
User Avatar
Buz Groshong

 
Posts: 2837
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 10:58 pm
Location: Alexandria, Virginia, United States
Thanked: 683 times in 480 posts

alls well that ends well

Postby fieldtouring » Tue Nov 04, 2008 3:05 pm

As a footnote to this thread, which I have just stumbled back upon, the chap who took the images initially has now become a very good friend, and the web-site designer for several of my companies! Just goes to show huh!
User Avatar
fieldtouring

 
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 12:56 am
Location: Perth, Australia
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Postby nartreb » Tue Nov 04, 2008 5:40 pm

Buz is right:

§ 505. Remedies for infringement: Costs and attorney's fees

In any civil action under this title, the court in its discretion may allow the recovery of full costs by or against any party other than the United States or an officer thereof. Except as otherwise provided by this title, the court may also award a reasonable attorney's fee to the prevailing party as part of the costs.


§ 412. Registration as prerequisite to certain remedies for infringement

In any action under this title, other than an action brought for a violation of the rights of the author under section 106A(a), an action for infringement of the copyright of a work that has been preregistered under section 408(f) before the commencement of the infringement and that has an effective date of registration not later than the earlier of 3 months after the first publication of the work or 1 month after the copyright owner has learned of the infringement, or an action instituted under section 411(b), no award of statutory damages or of attorney’s fees, as provided by sections 504 and 505, shall be made for —

(1) any infringement of copyright in an unpublished work commenced before the effective date of its registration; or

(2) any infringement of copyright commenced after first publication of the work and before the effective date of its registration, unless such registration is made within three months after the first publication of the work.


One of the reasons you pay for a lawyer's advice is so you can sue him/her for malpractice if (s)he's too lazy to read the whole statute ;)

But note that in many non-US juridictions, the losing party pays attorney fees, period.
User Avatar
nartreb

 
Posts: 2012
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 10:45 pm
Location: online or in boston, Massachusetts, United States
Thanked: 113 times in 92 posts

Postby MoapaPk » Tue Nov 04, 2008 5:59 pm

I wonder how many people on SP have "registered" their photos? Some always write "copyright of..." across some semi-inconspicuous place; will that have the same force as "registration"?
User Avatar
MoapaPk

 
Posts: 7669
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Thanked: 761 times in 494 posts

Postby Dave K » Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:15 pm

MoapaPk wrote:I wonder how many people on SP have "registered" their photos? Some always write "copyright of..." across some semi-inconspicuous place; will that have the same force as "registration"?



And why do you hate America?
User Avatar
Dave K
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 7935
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 2:40 pm
Location: Rancho Cordova, California, United States
Thanked: 77 times in 39 posts

Postby nartreb » Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:31 pm

A copyright notice is not the same thing as registration and does not suffice to claim statutory damages or attorney's fees in the US.

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap4.html
User Avatar
nartreb

 
Posts: 2012
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 10:45 pm
Location: online or in boston, Massachusetts, United States
Thanked: 113 times in 92 posts

Postby MoapaPk » Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:42 pm

Dave K wrote:
MoapaPk wrote:I wonder how many people on SP have "registered" their photos? Some always write "copyright of..." across some semi-inconspicuous place; will that have the same force as "registration"?



And why do you hate America?


By terrible coincidence, I had an uncle named Sam, who had a goatee and wore these bizarre striped pants and starred top hat. Sam was a mean SOB, and his image has led to certain unfortunate associations.
User Avatar
MoapaPk

 
Posts: 7669
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Thanked: 761 times in 494 posts

Postby Diego Sahagún » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:21 pm

http://www.alpinismonline.com/

lpinist, have you permited they to add your pic there :?:
User Avatar
Diego Sahagún

 
Posts: 14520
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2001 6:21 pm
Location: Madrid, Spain
Thanked: 590 times in 539 posts

PreviousNext

Return to General

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

© 2006-2013 SummitPost.org. All Rights Reserved.