My post from Oct27th was just cited for copyright infringement

"71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors" (adamprotter) 02/17/2014 at 15:11 • Filed to: None

0

28

I posted pictures from this !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and Gawker just informed me that my post had been edited to remove the infringing material.
!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
Can anyone help me figure out who I offended, Was it McLaren, GTspirit, or the photographer that took the pictures whom GTspirit didn't cite either
Also, what does that mean for the rest of us: if we post pictures form other websites, will those get taken down too? I really like seeing the pictures you guys post
Thanks for the time, and here are some photos that I've taken (less likely to infringe on someone else's work that way)

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

UPDATE: I got a reply from Gawker. The claim was filed by the original photographer, Altan Omer.
My bad Altan, I had trouble figuring out who took the pictures originally. Sorry about that.

SRSvictor > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:15

2

In my opinion,this is just ridiculous.You just posted a link to another website,I can't see what's wrong with that.

Tekamul > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:16

3

Thanks to the beauty of Kinja, 2 of the pictures still exist in some capacity in the comments, due to the caption feature.

Seriously, I have no idea. My guess is GTspirit complained, and they are their photos.

Hopefully this won't be a trend.

Dwhite - Powered by Caffeine, Daft Punk, and Corgis > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:18

1

This has happened once before. Someone posted a pic of an Alpine and the photographer got all bitchy about it. I think is was Bandit, but dont quote me on that. But to your question, I'm not sure. You might be able to ask gawker about it, but idk.

Brian Silvestro > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:19

6

That's like telling someone you have to go to France to see what the Mona Lisa looks like.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:20

3

I smell

That smells smelly.

Corporate lawyers...

lonestranger > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:25

0

I remember a while back, an independant photographer came here to Oppo and commented that he wanted his photos removed. Whoever wrote the article (sorry, I forget who it was) left the photos up, but then edited it cited the source, thus driving traffic to the photog's site where he sold his photos. It seemed to be a win-win. The guy was getting nothing more than free exposure, yet his panties were still in a huge bunch.

twinturbobmw > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:34

1

That's so unnecessary. All we're doing is sharing pictures. If anything it promotes them assuming they use watermarks on their photos.

71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors > SRSvictor 02/17/2014 at 15:38

0

I had pictures from the other website embedded in the article, and when the claim came, Gawker edited the photos out of the post

Victorious Secret > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:40

2

GT doesn't own the photos, Definitive Wax took them. GT wrote an article. They have no rights over it.

I can see Definitive laying ownership, but why would they care? They uploaded those last October. GT wrote it on the 27th, Definitive had them up the 26th.

f86sabre > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:40

0

Kinja and fair use is an interesting question. Nominally, those of us on Oppo are just normal folks posting in what could be considered a forum. None of us are looking to make a buck on anything. Now, things can be shared to the main pages where ads are added and there is every intention of driving page views and ad revenue for Gawker. So, what happens then?

SRSvictor > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:41

0

Hmm,but still,it's not like you claimed credit for those photos or put a watermark on them so I still can't see the problem here.Maybe if we all start writing "No Copywright infringement intended" at the end of these kinds of posts.

71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors > Victorious Secret 02/17/2014 at 15:44

0

Thanks for the Info. I was trying to figure out who originally took the pictures

TheLOUDMUSIC- Put it in H! > Dwhite - Powered by Caffeine, Daft Punk, and Corgis 02/17/2014 at 15:45

1

Sparf IIRC

Victorious Secret > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:48

1

Even if Definitive had an agreement with GT to give photos, Definitive is still the title owner of the photos and they are the only ones legally allowed to make copyright claims, unless GT actually paid for and has a signed document stating that ownership was transferred in which case they can litigate away.

But I doubt that. I doubt that very much.

71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors > Victorious Secret 02/17/2014 at 15:53

0

We don't actually know if GTspirit filed the claim though. I'm going to email the help line that they provided to try and get to the bottom of this

Victorious Secret > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:54

0

Well, I find it really unlikely that Definitive would file anything so late after the fact.

GT seems more likely since they might actively pursue such infringements.

It might have even been a bot that scours posts, which is bizarre.

Making a copyright claim period seems silly. If this was suddenly frowned upon all forums on Earth would go belly up.

davedave1111 > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 15:55

0

It's rare to have problems, but when you're posting pictures because they're good pictures it's only right to link to the original source - give credit where it's due and all that. They're still within their rights to request you don't use them, but mostly they won't. It's not clear from the edited post if you linked or not.

It's a little different morally (but not legally) I feel when you're using something which is just a generic pic of some car, but if you can get a free-to-use one from Wikipedia or somewhere, that's to be preferred.

SonorousSpeedJoe > Dwhite - Powered by Caffeine, Daft Punk, and Corgis 02/17/2014 at 15:58

0

It was Sparf - the photo was by some dude named André C. Hulstaert or something, and he made a copyright claim. He made an account to post here and, if memory serves, he spun some crap about wanting $50 regardless of how it turned out.

71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors > Victorious Secret 02/17/2014 at 15:59

0

Yeah, I agree with you there. I care less about my actual post and more about the precedent it sets for Oppo though

Roberto G. > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 16:09

0

I'd give one minute of my life, just to be sued by Leonardo da Vinci.

71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors > Victorious Secret 02/17/2014 at 16:22

0

It was the original photographer who filed the claim, not GTspirit

Paul, Man of Mustangs > SonorousSpeedJoe 02/17/2014 at 16:33

0

I remember that. Ah, good times.

Porsche924GTR > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 02/17/2014 at 16:37

0

Photographers should put watermarks on their work. More publicity for them and protects their work. Fk'n free advertising. I'll share all my albums if it gets me a new job as a photographer.

Thisnewformatisrubbish > Porsche924GTR 02/20/2014 at 19:26

0

If they didn't want it on the internet.... don't put it on the internet.

Altan Omer > 71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors 04/22/2014 at 08:55

2

Hello to all in this thread about Blue McLaren P1 images that have been extensively taken and used all around the web. I am Altan Omer the photographer who owns the copyright and I am the originator of the images. I thought I should comment in this thread to try to explain the position. I was commissioned by my client Definitive Wax to take the pictures. DW post them where they see fit to further their brand. That is the intended use. The error made by gtspirit, supecarkids, autobestlist, inautonews…and others is that they take the images from one another or from the DW facebook page with no offer or request for usage. That is copyright infringement, they have not asked/negotiated directly for a licence to use to be granted from the copyright owner.

The articles posted are using my images to support their text, that in turn creates an interest and a readership following. Some infringers may just be keenly interested in the cars and are doing things innocently, they are still doing wrong by using the images. Most of the websites in question host advertising and need the traffic to help get the advertising seen and therefore generate an income for themselves. Therefore they are indirectly earning out of images that they have not paid for. At the time the news value of the McL P1 images was high. The blue car was one of the first UK delivered cars and unauthorised use of the images detracts from the exclusivity DW had. The earning potential for the images was not explored as DW had an exclusive licence.

The culture of the web has led to people who just take and re-post without ever questioning if they have a right, or if they should credit the owner. Some infringers have said that it is fair game if it is on the web….No it isn't! If you left the door open at your home is it fair game for me to come in and take your stuff? No it is still stealing. Why not watermark your work you might say? The images were never intended for that and why should I, but we are force to now. Unfortunately when images are uploaded to some online social websites all the metadata contained in the images is stripped out so the trace to the owner becomes difficult.

The worst infringers have taken the images added to their articles and added their own watermark over my images, this passes the work off as their own…blatant breach of copyright! I have met with one infringer the famous Shmee150 who through supercarkids used the images. SCK is associated with Shmee and links to his website. I don't have to explain how these things work, but if you get high hits you can earn from advertising….Visitors to SKC may follow the links from there to elsewhere and someone is earning nicely out of it. Not me the originator and not my client and their brand.

What should have been done by the infringers? Not to breach copyright a link to the images posted by DW would have not damaged any rights. To request use from DW and subsequently me would have been the correct thing to do and to negotiate a use.

All kinds of people generate work, art, books and music all covered by copyright, we are all aware of it but choose these days to take, copy and borrow this makes it harder for the originators to generate an income and to manage the rights of their work.

That is why I spread the word to various sites and was met by sorry, we'll remove them, prove they are yours, etc. All the users could/should be liable to paying for their unauthorised use but unfortunately for me people run and hide.

I ask that these online web magazines introduce checks to make sure they have a rights to the images and copy they use.

Hopefully a happy conclusion; Shmee and others (come forward) will look to make a recompense by giving a link from his/their websites to fine art prints of McL P1 images I have taken, available to order on my website soon.

Altan

71MGBGT Likes Subarus of Unusual Colors > Altan Omer 04/22/2014 at 12:10

0

Thank you very much coming here and explaining what's going on. I sincerely apologize for using your work without permission, and I greatly appreciate that you took the time to give us a straightforward, no BS, answer. The photos were amazing BTW.

Party-vi > Altan Omer 04/22/2014 at 12:28

0

Thank you for sharing your side of this issue.

Question - do you still own the rights to the photos or are those rights owned by DW? I have always been curious as to how this works. After you take photos for a client are the photos still your property or do they now belong to the client (DW)? Does the owner of the vehicle have a say in where the photos are used, or does he sign this right away?

Hermann > Dwhite - Powered by Caffeine, Daft Punk, and Corgis 04/22/2014 at 12:32

0

I remember that. I remember that some of us (including me) even made fun of the guy and he got pissed with all of us.

I think I made fun of his passive aggressive way of writing.