Archive

Posts Tagged ‘copyright’

Interesting Links, March 16, 2010

March 16th, 2010 by Maria Langer

Here are links I found interesting on March 16, 2010:

This just in... , , , , , , , , , ,

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please comment on it or share a little link love:
Add to Del.icio.us Add to Del.icio.us    Technorati This Technorati This    Digg This Digg This    Stumble It Stumble it!    Twit This Tweet This

Interesting Links, March 9, 2010

March 9th, 2010 by Maria Langer

Here are links I found interesting on March 9, 2010:

  • Image Watermark Hijacking – Interesting example of how watermarking images may not be enough to protect them from theft — and what you can do about it. On PlagiarismToday.com
  • Palin’s Canadian health care claim stuns critics – Can you say hypocrite? Thanks to Canadian @AprilMains for sharing this morning's laugh at Sarah Palin's expense.
  • Photography Classes – Here's a list of photography classes at the Phoenix Desert Botanical Gardens. We went to a lecture last night and it was great.
  • Reflections on Avatar Ray Kurzweil – Interesting review of Avatar by Ray Kurzweil. I agree with much of what he has to say, but I think he over-analyzed it. the movie simply wasn't as deep as he gives it credit for being. Thanks to @estherschindler for sharing the link.
  • The Ad-Blocker’s Dilemma – Some interesting thoughts on blocking ads on Web sites. On PlagiarismToday.com.
  • Copyright Issues: Photographer POV – A promotional video from Getty Images that includes an interview with two photographers. They explain their point of view on illegal use of their images, as well as the cost of being commercial photographers. On YouTube. Thanks to @plagiarismtoday for sharing the link.
  • Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin, evolution – I find this news article on the AP Web site extremely disturbing. Does this mean that a subset of the U.S. population will be taught that evolution is wrong? On APNews.com.

This just in... , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please comment on it or share a little link love:
Add to Del.icio.us Add to Del.icio.us    Technorati This Technorati This    Digg This Digg This    Stumble It Stumble it!    Twit This Tweet This

Why I’m Watermarking All of My “Good” Photos

February 15th, 2010 by Maria Langer

And why other serious photographers should, too.

Bowman Lake

This photo of Bowman Lake at Glacier National Park appears in my photoblog, Maria’s Pix, today.

The watermark/copyright notice argument goes back and forth all the time.

On one side are the bloggers and readers of Web content who have created and seen more crap online than the rest of the human race combined. These people claim that copyright notices on photos are tacky and make the photos look ugly. They go on to say — and there is definitely some truth to this — that the average photo on the Web is so poor in quality that the photographer has no need to worry about it being stolen.

On the other side are the serious — or possibly professional — photographers who want to show off their work online but protect it from theft. These people are tired of seeing the results of their hard work and investment in costly equipment appearing on someone else’s Flickr account or in blog posts. Or, as in my case, in an e-mail postcard sent to me.

Why People Steal Photographs and other Web Content

Joshua Tree Bouquet

I clearly recall lying on my stomach on cold rock to get the right angle for this shot. Photographed at Joshua Tree National Park.

There are two reasons why people steal photographs and other content they find on the Web:

  • They mistakenly believe that anything that appears on the Web is in the public domain. This is not true. Most Web content is protected by the same copyright law as the most recent Dan Brown masterpiece of fiction (yes, I’m being sarcastic) or Black Eyed Peas single (do they still call them that?) or Pixar animated feature film. When these people honestly don’t know any better, they’re making an honest mistake. But when they’re told they’re infringing someone’s copyright and they refuse to believe it, they’re being downright stupid and putting themselves in the next group of people.
  • They simply don’t care about the rights of content creators. These people know that what they’re doing is wrong but they simply don’t care. Perhaps they think they’ll get away with it. Or that since everyone does it, the content creator won’t bother trying to stop them. They’re wrong. Many bloggers, photographers, and other content creators actively pursue copyright infringers — and win in court.

I follow many photographers on Twitter and have seen more than one of them complain about their work being used elsewhere without their permission. In many cases, a bunch of us will “gang up” on a copyright infringer to attack him/her for his actions in blog or photo comments. This usually gets some kind of result. A properly prepared DMCA Takedown Notice usually does a better job.

Just Say No to Flickr

In one blatant case I recall on Flickr, a woman was stealing photos from photographers all over the Web and passing them off as her own. If she really had such a huge, diverse library of quality photos, she’d be famous. But all she had was a big, diverse collection of quality photos she’d stolen from other photographers, removing any copyright notices she found along the way. It was quite easy to convince the powers that be at Flickr that she was a thief. Flickr closed down her account. Has she learned her lesson? Who knows?

The worst thing about Flickr is that if someone steals a photo and puts it on his/her Flickr account under a Creative Comments Attribution License, anyone else is free to use the image if they give the Flickr user credit. That means that not only is he/she making a photographer’s work “legal” to reproduce, but he/she will get credit instead of the photographer!

As you can imagine, I don’t use Flickr. It simply makes content theft too easy.

Why I’m Watermarking

I’ll be the first to agree that watermarking photos — putting a visible copyright notice on the face of a photo — can be downright ugly. Depending on how it’s done, it can really detract from the aesthetics of the photograph as a whole. That’s why I’ve avoided them for so long.

But the other day, I got an e-mail from one of Flying M Air’s aerial photography clients. He’d given me permission to include some of his images on Flying M Air’s Client Photos page. Flying M Air has an unusual photo format. Each photo is brought into Photoshop, given a yellow background, white border, and drop shadow. It’s then tilted 2° or 3° to give it the feel of a photo album. I purposely use small images, not only to offer more room for text but to make the photos less useful to a thief. Unfortunately, one of his photos had been stolen and it appeared in a Flickr photo stream. The photographer was certain it had come from my site. He said that he’d given me permission to reproduce them, but only if I watermarked them. (I honestly don’t remember the watermark requirement.) To avoid problems in the future, I simply removed his photos from my site. If he experiences any more theft, it won’t come from me.

But the whole thing got me thinking. Here was a professional photographer whose work was being lifted from a third party site and being displayed on yet another site. He’d relied on me to watermark his work. Wouldn’t it have been better if he simply watermarked it himself?

And wouldn’t it be better if I simply watermarked my best work myself?

You might be asking why: what’s the purpose?

The purpose is education. While a watermark probably won’t deter a content thief who simply doesn’t care that he’s stealing from me, it might educate the person who thinks all content on the Web is free to take and use as desired. Or it might protect my work from the person who thinks that only those photos with a copyright notice are protected.

My client issued a takedown notice to the person who stole his photo from my site. The photo was immediately removed. I like to think that the person who stole it simply didn’t know any better. Now he does.

Zenfolio

I should mention here that in addition to my photoblog, I also maintain a library of images at a custom Zenfolio site. Zenfolio is a photo sharing site that offers a number of features a service like Flickr doesn’t offer. For example:

  • I can have my own domain name (www.FlyingMPhotos.com).
  • I can sell photos using format I specify — and actually profit from a sale.
  • I can create custom watermarks that are automatically placed on each image for display.
  • I can limit the sizes of photos that can be displayed.
  • I can customize the appearance of my photo gallery pages.
Wildflowers

I photographed these wildflowers near a mine site last February.

The list goes on and on.

Yes, I do pay an annual fee for this service. But I think it’s worth $100 a year to have control over how my photos are displayed and offered for sale. And I like the fact that my Zenfolio portfolio is completely separate from all others. On services like Flickr and Red Bubble (which I used to use), your photos are simply part of a much larger portfolio of diverse and often quality-challenged work. People who visit my portfolio aren’t exposed to that — unless they want to be.

I like the way Zenfolio places watermarks on images. They’re visible yet don’t need to jump out of the photo at you. I chose the same method for my photo blog; you can see it on all the images on this post. I used Photoshop to create the notice, applied an Emboss filter, saved it as a PNG with transparent background, and then applied it to photos with 20% to 50% opacity. Done.

What Do You Think?

I’d be very interested in hearing what other serious and professional photographers think about watermarking images. I’d also like to see examples of what photographers think are successfully applied watermarks. Use the comments link or form for this post to share your thoughts, horror stories, and links to one or two of your watermarked images.

I’m not interested in hearing from Internet trolls who want to criticize concerned photographers for wanting to protect their work. Or people who want to argue that Internet content is not copyrighted — get with the program already, folks.

About the Photos ,

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please comment on it or share a little link love:
Add to Del.icio.us Add to Del.icio.us    Technorati This Technorati This    Digg This Digg This    Stumble It Stumble it!    Twit This Tweet This

Distributed Proofreading

June 24th, 2009 by Maria Langer

Doing my part to preserve history and get out-of-copyright books into digital format.

Distributed ProofreadersAbout a month ago, before I left home for the summer, I stumbled upon the Distributed Proofreaders Web site. The best way to describe the site is to echo the text on its home page under Site Concept:

Distributed Proofreaders provides a web-based method to ease the conversion of Public Domain books into e-books. By dividing the workload into individual pages, many volunteers can work on a book at the same time, which significantly speeds up the creation process.

Here’s how it works. Someone, somewhere scans printed book pages into a computer as images. OCR software is applied to translate the text into machine-readable text characters. Then volunteer proofreaders step in and compare the original scanned pages to the editable text. Proofreaders follow a set of proofing guidelines to ensure consistency as they modify the translated text. Each page passes through a series of steps that eventually turns all of a book’s pages into a single text document. That document is then released as a free ebook in a variety of formats via Project Gutenberg.

I became a volunteer. So far, I’ve proofed 14 pages. I know that doesn’t seem like a lot — and it’s not — but if 100 people each proofed 14 pages a week, 1,400 pages a week would be proofed. That’s what the “distributed” in Distributed Proofreading is all about.

The good part about being a proofreader — other that warm, fuzzy feeling you get from helping to make the world a better place — is that you get to read lots of old books about topics that interest you. The day I joined, I proofread two pages of a New York newspaper account of World War I. It was fascinating. Today, I proofread 12 pages of a biography of Benjamin Franklin, who I believe is the greatest American who ever lived. (There is a lot to be learned from Franklin’s life and writings.)

Why am I blogging about this? Well, I’m hoping that other folks will embrace this project and donate an hour or two a week (or a month) to proofreading pages. The more folks who work on this project, the more quickly these great old books and other pieces of literature will get into free digital format for readers and students to enjoy.

Want to help ebooks thrive? Give distributed proofreading a try.

Deep Thoughts, In Books , , ,

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please comment on it or share a little link love:
Add to Del.icio.us Add to Del.icio.us    Technorati This Technorati This    Digg This Digg This    Stumble It Stumble it!    Twit This Tweet This

A Tale of two Copyright Infringements

December 28th, 2008 by Maria Langer

Together, we can stop it.

CopyrightThe other day, while trying in vain to catch up with missed tweets by the people I follow on Twitter, I noticed that two of my Twitter friends were dealing with copyright-related issues. Since then, both issues were resolved. I believe that part of the reason for the speedy resolution of these problems was involvement by the Twitter community.

Content Theft

The first case came to light when one of my Twitter friends, @anntorrence, complained that she had not gotten a response from the blogger who used one of her articles on his site. The link to the article in question told the rest of the story. Ann had written a great tips piece about preparing for a cold-weather photowalk. The article was originally published on Ann’s blog, Pixel Remix: the Ann-alog. Later, it was picked up with her permission on Photowalking Utah. The same article was picked up without her permission by a new photowalking Web site that was obviously anxious to build content and Google juice.

Ann’s article is copyrighted — as is most content on the Web. Her obvious distress over the piece being used without her permission bothered me. After all, I earn my living as a writer and have seen my own content stolen again and again. In my case, it often affects my livelihood by distributing content that I normally receive royalties for. But that doesn’t mean that content theft is any less wrong when it’s from a blog or other free source.

I went to the Web site guilty of the theft and posted a comment there. I also wrote to the owner of the site. I was horrified not only to see the theft, but because that site was one of the few that I actually paid to advertise my helicopter business on. I was not interested in supporting a site that was stealing content. If they stole from Ann, who else had they stolen from? How much of the content was original or reused with permission? (Needless to say, I pulled my ad immediately.)

The owner of the site made the fatal error of replying to me in Twitter. He defended his actions by saying that he “gives credit when due.” He was obviously clueless about copyright law — as most people incapable of creating their own content appear to be. He seemed to think that if it was on the Web, it was free for use anywhere, as long as he put a byline for the original author. He appeared to think he was being generous by including a link back to the article — not the original, but the site he stole it from.

An @reply argument ensued, with me trying to educate him and him responding arrogantly. He tried to continue the argument in e-mail. After I left my computer (and Twitterrific), he was apparently blasted by other Twitter users who got in on the discussion with their own @replies.

Ann has since gotten satisfaction for the situation — her article has been removed. Unfortunately, the owner of the site still doesn’t get it. He has written a post apologizing for not giving proper links back to original articles. He evidently does not understand that he needs permission to reuse copyrighted work.

I wonder what Scott Kelby will say when he sees his work used on the offender’s site. Personally, I hope he sues the site owner’s sorry ass.

I would urge people to boycott the site, but that might send new visitors there just to check it out. Instead, I’ll just urge people not to frequent sites that steal content. If you think a blog’s post contains content used without permission, don’t be afraid to comment about it.

Removing Copyright Notices

The second case was far more blatant. Some idiot had written a blog post about how to remove copyright notices from photos and other images found on the Web. As if that wasn’t bad enough, he used someone else’s copyrighted image for his example. That someone else was @PattyHankins, one of my Twitter friends.

Patty mentioned the problem in Twitter and I went to investigate. The post in question was a typical hacker/pirate post with instructions for removing copyright notices that were part of a photo. Patty’s photo appeared numerous times in the step-by-step instructions. After the first time, the author of the post made a comment like, “I don’t know who Patty Hankins is, but nice picture.” Extremely obnoxious.

I posted a comment to the post. I can’t remember exactly what I said, but it clearly pointed out that the author of the post and site was violating Patty’s copyright. Evidently, many other Twitter users did the same thing. So when Patty sent his ISP a DMCA notice, she got a quick response. The photo was removed within four hours.

Patty referred me to “Using the DMCA Takedown Notice to Battle Copyright Infringement” on NatureScapes.net for what she says is the most effective sample DMCA letter she’s ever used.

Again, I believe that one of the reasons Patty had a relatively easy time of getting the photo off the infringer’s Web site was the outpouring of comments by outraged Twitter users.

For More Information…

If this post interests you, you might be interested in the following links. This list is not computer-generated.

And please do use the Comments link or form to add your thoughts about this matter. If you are one of the offending bloggers, however, don’t waste your time. My blog is not your soapbox.

Related Posts:

Related Links:

On Blogging, The Writing Life , , ,

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please comment on it or share a little link love:
Add to Del.icio.us Add to Del.icio.us    Technorati This Technorati This    Digg This Digg This    Stumble It Stumble it!    Twit This Tweet This