Taking Photo's of brands/Copyright etc

[Former Member 1]

Is this the type of advice endorsed by the Scottish Business Forums? If this was a requirement then many law abiding, tax paying small businesses like mine would struggle to survive.

Well you see that's the problem....

You've admitted to at least TWO instances of NOT abiding to the law!

Who knows how many more wait to be uncovered???

 

[Former Member 1]

but this is my house so they will probably scratch their head and wonder what the hell you are on about.

Yes of course they will..... Just like trading standards and HMRC neither of whom are the slightest bit interested in people operating businesses unlawfully....:lol::lol::lol:

Yes you can. I am only responding where I feel that I have to and because this has become very personal. It has turned into a hate fest with people ganging up to explore every nook and cranny to find different ways to threaten and insult me.

You haven't been threatened....

However, you are being called to lawful account. After all, it was YOU who came HERE to shoot your 'mouth' off. YOU'RE the one that's been pontificating on the law when all the time it would seem that you've been operating outside it....

It's become personal? Threatening?

Let's just recap on your FIRST post Bryan....

After you do so we'll see what's what.

Well we did see; didn't we? And then......

* Can you tell me what "legitimate academic institution" endorses language like this from one of their lecturers because I would like to discuss this with them?

* Can I also ask you to confirm what legitimate legal qualifications you have that allow you to teach IP law?

This from a man who in his late 30's was sitting three modules from an elementary course and didn't reach HNC level until he was 44!

it is obvious that you do not have the courage

From a man who doesn't put his name to his posts or his business...

You other guys will probably not be interested in the facts

From a man who denies the facts from sources such as companies house even when he's given the links...

And the band played ...

:laugh::laugh::laugh: "Breakin the law" was what they played...

thank you but I prefer to deal with people who are prepared to stand with their convictions

But you don't have the conviction to put your own name to the nonsense you preach?

Please do not continue to insinuate that I am unqualified to do what I do.

FRom the very same post in which he ADMITTED he wasn't! :laugh::laugh::laugh:

Mouse Pie anyone???

 

[Former Member 1]

Goodnight and may your God go with you.

Well, as we're going all religious....:001_tt2::001_tt2::001_tt2::001_tt2:

YouTube - Judas Priest - Breaking the Law

 

[stugster]

Incidentally try the validation tool on
amazon.co.uk
or
Google.co.uk
or
Yahoo.co.uk

That's how important they consider this to be so why should I worry. Having a site that does not fully validate does not make you a bad person but mine now does after a minor correction to an alt tag. Thanks for pointing that out. You guys should have a look at your own sites now.

Ah but, they don't consider them to be professional designers. You on the other hand, do. And as a professional designer, you should be aware (for your clients sake) of Validation and the importance of it.

I don't need to look at my site, because I'm not a professional designer.

I have nothing to hide

Apart from your address.


Sorry mate, you're moaning and whining about the fact that the wolves have come out to "insult you". Firstly, they haven't insulted you. Secondly, it's your own fault. You're the one who came on here all guns blazing. What did you expect? For everyone to take off their shoes and pray to you?

Behave.

 

[Former Member 1]

What did you expect? For everyone to take off their shoes and pray to you?

That's EXACTLY it.....

Bryan, You're simply condemned by your own words and your own actions...

What makes me angry is that guys like you are all too common in the creative industries. It's characters like you that bring the Creative Industries into disrepute.

You're in this position because....

YOU damn well either didn't know or didn't care what you were doing. i.e. you've been masquerading as a competent professional when all the time, you are DEMONSTRABLY (as evidenced by your unlawful use of other people's material) no such thing...

YOU broke the law..... And as recently as last night YOU WERE STILL breaking the law! ...Yet you chose to lecture others on it. Self appointed, unqualified, untrained, unchecked and unverified. AND DESPITE people who actually ARE qualified to speak and DO know what they're talking about you insist that you, in your 'infinite wisdom' know better...

AND THAT SIR IS A DISGRACE. SHAME UPON YOU, SHAME UPON THE PLATFORM THAT SUPPORTED YOU. IF YOU HAD A SHRED OF INTEGRITY. A GRAIN OF SENSE TO REALISE WHAT IS RIGHT AND WHAT IS WRONG YOU WOULD, EVEN NOW, BE APOLOGISING FOR THE PATENT RUBBISH YOU HAVE PLACED ONLINE AND APOLOGISING TO EVERYONE WHO BOUGHT INTO YOUR HALF-BAKED RAMBLINGS AND MIGHT FIND THEMSELVES DISADVANTAGED AS A RESULT.

People are in trouble with the law.... And YOUR position is that they should try to avoid and evade the lawful consequence of that?

I SERIOUSLY hope many many many people take the warning about you. You seek attention? You seek publicity; Well I'm only too happy to make damn sure you get it!

In a little over an hour I'll be facing a class full of young people who actually ARE putting in the work to qualify to follow a career path. And frankly I have to spend FAR to much of my time teaching and warning them NOT to buy into the sort of practices and notions put forward by the likes of you!

You suggested this was a hate-fest and that this was happening because you're not part of 'our gang'. Well, if this alleged gang exists at all it is one where admittance depends upon being a LEGITIMATE business person, KNOWING your job, operating within the law and actually having some LEGITIMATE basis on which to speak on certain subjects... ALL of which requires years of hard work and study and dedication.... IS it any wonder that a man who either doesn't know or doesn't care about the law is rounded upon???

This is a respectable forum for legitimate business people.

 

[beedee]

Let it be on record in this forum that I am categorically stating that I did not break the law and I did not admit to breaking any law. I have never been charged with any infringement. Let it also be on record that that to claim that I did so is wrong and defamatory. I admitted to using a small shopping cart icon (not a photographic image) that Corbis claimed was theirs. They failed to offer any proof that it was theirs so I sought legal advice and upon the advice of my lawyer I refused to pay what they demanded.

Regarding the claim that I am breaking the law by not displaying my full address on my website I am not aware of any law that requires me to do so. On my website I tell people where I am based and provide an email address and telephone number. I also provide my full contact details on every email so that clients know exactly where I am.

Yesterday evening I had to point out that the vehicle that was being used to make these claims, i.e. the forum hosting company was breaking the law (as a limited company by not providing their full contact details). To keep this in perspective I do not consider that makes them unethical or real "law breakers" but by your code of standards you obviously would.

 

[stugster]

We were law breakers. And it was very unethical. That is why we corrected it immediately, and thanked you for bringing it to our attention

 

[TomB]

Let it be on record in this forum that I am categorically stating that I did not break the law and I did not admit to breaking any law. I have never been charged with any infringement. Let it also be on record that that to claim that I did so is wrong and defamatory. I admitted to using a small shopping cart icon (not a photographic image) that Corbis claimed was theirs. They failed to offer any proof that it was theirs so I sought legal advice and upon the advice of my lawyer I refused to pay what they demanded.

Brian, you admitted that you used the shopping cart icon without paying for it.

Icons are still subject to the same copyright as images.

I HIGHLY DOUBT that a company such as Corbis would go around making up claims that you were using their images.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Hi All, had to join here, hope I am welcome

This thread was pointed out to me by a friend, so I have just read right the way through.

I was involved in the FSB thread for a long time, and in fairness to the FSB, the forum is semi autonomous, and I know that they see it as an evil necessity but a HUGE risk. This is the same for any large body really, so maybe we shouldn't beat them up. Dave does a good job moderating the place, especially given some of the people who post there (I include Beedee in this statement but am naming him independently to avoid 13 pages of he said she said )

I stopped posting in the thread due to the attacks I was getting, people turning on me because they didn't like what I said.

Here are some of my comments that didn't go down well:-

In reply to the ownership question:

Good question. The answer is simple, they don't have to. Copyright comes under the banner of IPO intellectual property ownership. What is copyright? One has to ASSUME that there is an owner of an image, and it is YOUR DUTY to find the owner and ask their permission. EVERY SINGLE IMAGE in the world is owned by someone. The owner might well have granted unlimited use of their images, but it is YOUR duty to find out who owns the image before use.

I feel for you I really do, but believing you have the right to use someone else's property simply because you do not know who the owner is, or that the owner has not written " this property belongs to" on it is naive in the extreme.

I have suggested MANY times that Getty could overcome this by watermarking ALL their owned images. Hell they do it on istockphoto, so why not elsewhere?

Your final point is a fine example of ignorance of the law though (please don't think I am having a go at you, I am not). Indeed if the owner of that bank note could prove that you took his property and did not notify the police of your find (your legal duty),the INDEED you COULD be charged with theft by finding.

The crux of this is simple, and here it rests in law.

Are you the owner?

if the answer is no, then you have no right to use said item. Using someones image is no different to riding their bike, driving their car, eating someone lunch that was left on a park bench in error.

One must ASSUME there is an owner and it is our legal obligation to track the owner. In the case of the bank note your legal duty is to deliver it to the police who will receipt it, and if it is not claimed within a set amount of time, ownership defaults to the possessor IE. the finder, as the police were simply holding it on your and the owners behalf.

Imagine someone left their bag on a bench, you picked it up, decided you would keep it. Their keys were inside. A month later they saw their bag, approached you, called the police and you were arrested. They COULD claim the cost of replacing the door locks because you STOLE their property. Just because something is left lying about, doesn't mean it does not have an owner.

Reply again:-

guys you are MISSING the whole point. I said it is up to the individual to check ownership, and you have all RIGHTLY pointed out that this is almost impossible THAT WAS MY POINT .

EVERYTHING that is created has an an IP owner EVERYTHING. and your ignorance of the laws of IP is no defence.

I am sympathetic to BOTH sides in this argument as there are right and wrong on both.

I have repeatedly stated that the use of images is simple. Carry out due diligence when using third parties, IE SPECIFICALLY get them to grant you a written licence to use all images, AND give you detailed provenance if they will not do so, then you can't use them. AND keep an audit trail of images you use.

I was accused of having a hidden agenda, when I stated that I have a provenance report for each job I do be it text, images etc ANYTHING. I buy my images for Getty, and when they send letters, they are supplied with the licence number and are happy as Larry (why is this I wonder)?

Beedee & I have 'disagreed' a number of times, to the point where I could see no benefit in my continuing to 'try' to bring sanity to the debate where advice to people often given out was to ignore the letter ?

I left as it got nasty not only with Beedee, but with one or two other members/new members. I suspected collaboration, and when this was confirmed via PM by a new member who let slip that He & Beedee had been communicating via Pm about me and that I wasn't welcome there, I decided I had bigger and better fish to fry, and have not posted there since.

Professionalism is more than getting paid to do something, it is a whole methodology.

 

[Senay]

A first post, I know, I can't help but respond to this.

This is the only forum I know where an administrator of a forum is happy to insult and damage the reputation of a member. (over an icon!!!)

I do run the same business from home, and your responses are that of a child.

 

[stugster]

I suspected collaboration, and when this was confirmed via PM by a new member who let slip that He & Beedee had been communicating via Pm about me and that I wasn't welcome there, I decided I had bigger and better fish to fry, and have not posted there since.

Funny you should mention that just as a new user after your post pops on and posts

 

[stugster]

A first post, I know, I can't help but respond to this.

This is the only forum I know where an administrator of a forum is happy to insult and damage the reputation of a member. (over an icon!!!)

I do run the same business from home, and your responses are that of a child.

You've obviously not got much experience with forums then, there are hundreds if not thousands of forums online that allow the Administrators to convey their own opinions and comments.

A child!? Me? I'm offended, and shall seek .... nah.. doesn't bother me one bit I can be quite immature, and do have a silly fascination with the word "jobby", it's just so funny!

Welcome to the forums, Senay, even if you are one of Beedee's cohorts.

 

[Scottish Business Owner]

This thread has run it's course. It's doing no one any good allowing this to continue. I am closing the post but will leave all the current information there.

I would ask that anyone who has issues with this contact me by PM in the first instance.