Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is there a "use of photos" legal notice on jp.net?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • kukkudrill
    replied
    Originally posted by Chris Kilroy
    Everything you just wrote is unilaterally untrue.
    Please elaborate. Do you mean the US Copyright Office website is wrong, or are you saying I have misunderstood it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Top_Gun
    replied
    Originally posted by Crism
    AMEN AMEN AMEN I SAY TO YOU! I will NEVER watermark my photos for this reason. They just look retarded and take away from the beauty of the picture.
    Bad Guy Mode,....

    Why lose out on money when someone steals pictures from the DB and doesn't offer you payment or even credit for the shot? Sure it's only a hobby, but why not let it open to something more if you get enough demand for your work?

    Can I steal your camera and lenes seeing it's just a hobby

    Leave a comment:


  • Crism
    replied
    Originally posted by gdg9
    I think the watermarks are terrible. I mean, its great that the site is offering it, but I think it ruins so many nice pictures. I can understand why some people may add them, but for me personally, this is a hobby and I will never be cluttering my shots with a silly watermark.
    AMEN AMEN AMEN I SAY TO YOU! I will NEVER watermark my photos for this reason. They just look retarded and take away from the beauty of the picture.

    Leave a comment:


  • gdg9
    replied
    Originally posted by MaxPower

    Edit: Btw, Does the photo look like crap to you ? I mean when it was uploaded without the watermark, it was the perfect shot of this image, now with the watermark, which I think it looks like this, There's alot of compression on the photo now.
    I think the watermarks are terrible. I mean, its great that the site is offering it, but I think it ruins so many nice pictures. I can understand why some people may add them, but for me personally, this is a hobby and I will never be cluttering my shots with a silly watermark.

    Leave a comment:


  • medic1
    replied
    Originally posted by MaxPower
    Edit: Btw, Does the photo look like crap to you ? I mean when it was uploaded without the watermark, it was the perfect shot of this image, now with the watermark, which I think it looks like this, There's alot of compression on the photo now .. Please check it on your own to verify this, either that or I need some glasses. It looks wierd on my screen.
    It does look like theres a fair amount of compression on my screen as well......

    Leave a comment:


  • E-Diddy!
    replied
    looks a little compressed to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • MaxPower
    replied
    I sometimes get aviation news from TAKEOFF.NU
    I know one of the editors from the Aviation news Website.
    One day he said that he had just saved one of the photos from Jetphotos. Its the photo below. It happened way before the watermarks got intergrated. Anyway I said to him, its okey, but you might want to include the photographers name or source.
    After two days, I saw the article from the website, the Editor used it without any information who took that photo, Although I have mentioned it to him that he should include it.

    [photoid=191300]

    I just checked the article before this post. It seems that it has been taken down. Atleast the photo is gone.



    Edit: Btw, Does the photo look like crap to you ? I mean when it was uploaded without the watermark, it was the perfect shot of this image, now with the watermark, which I think it looks like this, There's alot of compression on the photo now .. Please check it on your own to verify this, either that or I need some glasses. It looks wierd on my screen.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mungous
    replied
    I wouldn't go legally ballistic on them yet, try and settle it "politely" first

    I'd say it wasn't their anyways, probably whoever they contracted to do the website just nabbed them from here and hoped no one would notice.

    Leave a comment:


  • MaxPower
    replied
    Pretty cool Chris, to know that the photos are protected by the site.

    Leave a comment:


  • E-Diddy!
    replied
    Awesome Chris thanks a bunch for that.

    As a sidenote, you get my e-mail?

    Leave a comment:


  • Chris Kilroy
    replied
    Yes, we do:

    http://www.jetphotos.net/photousage/

    Originally posted by kukkudrill
    I think that what can make a difference isn't whether jp.net has a legal use policy but whether you registered your photos with the US copyright office. You have to register before you can sue (if it comes to that), but unless your photos were already registered before the infringement of copyright took place you will face limitations in what you are entitled to by way of compensation. See http://www.copyright.gov.
    Everything you just wrote is unilaterally untrue.

    Leave a comment:


  • kukkudrill
    replied
    I think that what can make a difference isn't whether jp.net has a legal use policy but whether you registered your photos with the US copyright office. You have to register before you can sue (if it comes to that), but unless your photos were already registered before the infringement of copyright took place you will face limitations in what you are entitled to by way of compensation. See http://www.copyright.gov.

    Leave a comment:


  • Top_Gun
    replied
    exactly why I'm glad they stepped up with the copy right on the pics.

    I would contact their marketing or legal department. I've read threads on other forums where photogs have caught companies using thier photos off the net and will charge them 2-3 times their normal usage fee.

    I would let them know those 2 pics are yours and you get paid so much for picture. You can also let them know that you have 2 of the brochures as evidence and will proceed to Small Claims court if this isn't settled.

    Just got done reading one post where the company didn't show up in court but did have to pay, even if it did take 2 months.

    Leave a comment:


  • E-Diddy!
    replied
    Originally posted by eagle334
    No matter if Jp has that or not, all the photos have a copyright at the bottom of them. I would seriously talk to a copyright lawyer. A friend of mine here in Western New York found New York State using some of his photos (not aircraft) and he has hit the proverbial jackpot. It is going to end up costing the state $250,000 - 300,000 to settle the matter, and yes, those are the right amount of zeros.

    Also, if you haven't spoken to them about it yet, I wouldn't. This all be fairly quiet until you decide to do something. If they are not caught "red handed" it will be hard to fight.

    Don't let them plead ignorance, you need to get something for your work. You have made photography a profession and something like this was bound to happen eventually.
    I've definetly caught them "red handed" I have the brochures sitting next to me with my photos there. I did leave them a nice voicemail on the matter, I'm only hoping to get a couple hundred bucks out of this especially since I'd like to keep my contacts open with them.

    Leave a comment:


  • eagle334
    replied
    No matter if Jp has that or not, all the photos have a copyright at the bottom of them. I would seriously talk to a copyright lawyer. A friend of mine here in Western New York found New York State using some of his photos (not aircraft) and he has hit the proverbial jackpot. It is going to end up costing the state $250,000 - 300,000 to settle the matter, and yes, those are the right amount of zeros.

    Also, if you haven't spoken to them about it yet, I wouldn't. This all be fairly quiet until you decide to do something. If they are not caught "red handed" it will be hard to fight.

    Don't let them plead ignorance, you need to get something for your work. You have made photography a profession and something like this was bound to happen eventually.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X