Copyright photos being used without permission

[RiverOaksFarm]

It’s funny how things work out sometimes, but this thread made me curious enough to look up the ad in question – nice foal, and nice stallion! That ad probably would have entirely slipped by me otherwise.

As far as using photos without permission, I can go you all one better ;). There is a woman using a photo of me, riding a client’s stallion, for the training page of her website. There is obviously no credit to me or the stallion I’m riding. She was asked nicely several times to take it down, but she wouldn’t/hasn’t, I believe it’s been on her site now for close to two years, sigh.

I also had someone take a photo off my site of a horse I had for sale, and put it on their site instead as if he was for sale at their farm. I’m not exactly sure how they thought that would work if they had someone contact them interested in him, since we weren’t even in the same state…

And I had someone take the text verbatum from my website from the Broodmares page and the Breeding Program page, and then put it on their website. Among other things, the text from my website made no sense out of context like that. And my text isn’t very “generic” – there is enough stuff in my text that would point to me, that someone else stumbled across their site and picked up on it, which is how I found out about it in the first place.

That’s all a long way of saying, things happen which are much, much worse than the original misunderstanding which started this thread.

Luckily in the case of this thread, both parties sound like nice, reasonable people and the whole thing was able to be sorted out, and it’s turned around to some nice publicity for both, a rare win-win!

[Tamara_in_TN]

[QUOTE=steppingstones;5415484]
I hope everyone has a wonderful day and for anyone interested in owning a horse as nice as Zaia her owner welcomes the idea of the dam producing another one upon request. please visit http://www.superiorwarmblood.com/cirquedusoleil.html to see the beauty all the fuss was about. And our stallion For Play doesn’t mind taking any other mares that can produce this kind of quality.
Dacia[/QUOTE]

oh my god !!! how much more free advertising can one place get ??

first the bragging about the breeders guide exact page and offended animal,
the link to the “offended” filly
three others chiming in about their relations to the offended filly
the offense causing stallion mentioned half dozen times
and NOW…

the ability to offer a custom foal just like the damned offended one “on request”

really ???

Tamara in TN
who has a great cob stallion, who can make great cob babies that do dressageyyy under saddle already and who thinks she’ll call and get one of the baby owners to start a thread about how much I SUCK (complete with links of course)

[Paula]

I find it amusing that the original poster is squawking about the use of this picture when you look at her own website and she has numerous, obviously professional pictures that have been used without credit (particularly under reference sires). Talk about glass houses…

As a photographer who does a lot of stallion photos I know that mare owners feel entitled to use any stallion pictures if they have a foal by that stallion. I have never been asked by a mare owner prior to a stallion picture being used on a website or add sales page for a foal. Could I go after those foal owners, yes. But really in life I have bigger battles to fight. For whatever reason people feel they can grab photos wherever they can on the web or elsewhere of their horses ancestors and post them to their web sites or adds and this falls outside copyright law. Well it doesn’t. For a person like the original poster to cry fowl when she is doing the exact same thing just defies logic…

[JackieBlue]

@Paula;5419231

For a person like the original poster to cry fowl when she is doing the exact same thing just defies logic…

TURKEY!!! CHICKEN!!! DUUUUUUCK!!

Just crying foWl. :lol::lol::lol::lol: Now back to your regularly scheduled b!itch session, er, I mean, thread.

[SHWarmblood]

If these are the claims you are making about us using photos then you need to take a CLOSER look at our site and our copyright page - we have exercised the utmost due diligence in obtaining permission to use any and all photos and information. We contacted as many photo/information owners as we could locate, including reference sites that posted photos or information on ancestral stallions. If you took a moment to look at our Ancestors section, you would see how many photos have a copyright with the web addresses of where the information came from - I even received a reply from Bernard le Courtois who was amused that I even contacted him just to use photos of Alme. And, believe it or not, some people don’t feel it necessary for photo/information users to post a link to their sites or re-copyright the information. So don’t point fingers as you really don’t know the length we go through just to post the information as legitimately and with as much permission as we were able to obtain.

And I never asked the SO to post any free advertising for our horses or a custom foal option and actually wish she had left that out entirely but she’s entitled to post whatever she’d like as well.

[back_in_the_saddle]

I personally can’t stand giving a photographer credit for pictures they took *when I bought the rights to the pictures. I personally won’t buy photos under an agreement that requires me to give credit like this. I have no problem in buying a picuture with a tactful watermark in a corner, but to leave it up to ME to give credit just isn’t going to happen all the time. I am human.

[tabula_rashah]

[QUOTE=back in the saddle;5420817]
I personally can’t stand giving a photographer credit for pictures they took *when I bought the rights to the pictures. I personally won’t buy photos under an agreement that requires me to give credit like this. I have no problem in buying a picuture with a tactful watermark in a corner, but to leave it up to ME to give credit just isn’t going to happen all the time. I am human.[/QUOTE]

So if you bought the Mona Lisa, you wouldn’t give DaVinci credit for it???

[back_in_the_saddle]

[QUOTE=tabula rashah;5420842]
So if you bought the Mona Lisa, you wouldn’t give DaVinci credit for it???[/QUOTE]

DOES HE NOT HAVE HIS MARK ON THE PICTURE? Why would I have to say who painted it if his signature is there? The picture speaks for itself.

Why is the job of protecting the copyright placed upon the buyer? If the photographer seriously wants to protect their picture, THEY need to protect it!!! Put a signature in the corner somewhere. (or never sell it in the first place). But don’t get in a hissy when someone slips up and doesn’t put a free ad for the photographer on their website.

[Graymaresrule]

Registry for failed RID stallions offspring

@RiverOaksFarm;5418798

I also had someone take a photo off my site of a horse I had for sale, and put it on their site instead as if he was for sale at their farm. I’m not exactly sure how they thought that would work if they had someone contact them interested in him, since we weren’t even in the same state…

LOL, someone posted a complaint about a bogus Irish Sport registry and I looked it up, only to find pictures of Sophie and her dam Beeza as well as 2 or 3 of PatO’s mares listed as on her farm for sale!

[sixpoundfarm]

[QUOTE=back in the saddle;5420863]
DOES HE NOT HAVE HIS MARK ON THE PICTURE? Why would I have to say who painted it if his signature is there? The picture speaks for itself.

Why is the job of protecting the copyright placed upon the buyer? If the photographer seriously wants to protect their picture, THEY need to protect it!!! Put a signature in the corner somewhere. (or never sell it in the first place). But don’t get in a hissy when someone slips up and doesn’t put a free ad for the photographer on their website.[/QUOTE]

So what if the person that ‘bought’ the photo removes the watermark or brand that WAS put on the images, and doesnt give credit on a website or in print ads?
Pretty brash and unprofessional, but I’ve had that happen too.

[Tasker]

[QUOTE=back in the saddle;5420817]
I personally can’t stand giving a photographer credit for pictures they took *when I bought the rights to the pictures. I personally won’t buy photos under an agreement that requires me to give credit like this. I have no problem in buying a picuture with a tactful watermark in a corner, but to leave it up to ME to give credit just isn’t going to happen all the time. I am human.[/QUOTE]

I agree to a point. But I have paid upwards of $500 to have ‘full usage rights’ to an image and will probably do so again in the future (like in the next 4-6 weeks). It is expensive and people are people - shall we say ‘forgetful’ when it comes to recognizing rights and fees?

I am a photographer in my spare time - weddings, etc. If I use someone else’s image on my website or blog they get a hyperlink and credit under/on the image and I am grateful that they got an image I could not. I am perfectly happy to give credit to the pro - they took the image - it is professional courtesy to give them the credit for the image. It is galling to say the least to have my own images turning up on other people’s websites with no credit but I won’t be pursuing a legal suit - it’s just not worth it. However, it is not ‘right’ either to just let things slide.

Most of the big pro’s I’ve dealt with have a sliding scale of pricing for ‘use’. Gone are the days when you bought the image for $15-25 and you got full rights to the image. But I have also seen the pros refuse to come back to a show when they are 1 of 10 professionals hired to shoot a competition and they are paying a full vendor fee. Photography is a really tough business to make a living in which is why is a ‘hobby’ of mine…sort of like how horse breeding is for a lot of people.

[back_in_the_saddle]

[QUOTE=sixpoundfarm;5420909]
So what if the person that ‘bought’ the photo removes the watermark or brand that WAS put on the images, and doesnt give credit on a website or in print ads?
Pretty brash and unprofessional, but I’ve had that happen too.[/QUOTE]

Then you’ve got a valid complaint. Same if that person altered the photo to something horrible and left your name on it. I personally don’t have time to alter anything.

I have no problem giving credit to a photographer as long as its’ convenient for me to do so. But when I have photos loaded on my hard drive and then want to use them, and then have to remember whoooooooo it was that took them, and then track that name down…with my schedule, I’m not really inclined to track down a name when I bought the picture. It should have that info on the face of the picture. Like daVinci. :yes: So as long as the logo is tactful but discreet, and does’t distract from the picture, I have no issues buying into an agreement that says I have to leave the logos on the photos. Make it easy for me. That’s all I ask.

[RiverOaksFarm]

I’m happy to give a photographer credit, but I’ll be the first to admit there are some photographers who I will not buy photos from because their usage rights are so strict. Luckily, there are others who are much easier to work with, and I am more than happy to support them by purchasing photos and crediting them on my website etc. I’m a big fan of the one time flat fee and photographers who let you buy the usage rights that way – even if it means I pay a little more, it is alot less headache in the long run. (I love working with Palmer Photography for exactly this reason – if they ever quit photographing Florida shows I don’t know what I’d do, lol…)

[hluing]

I had an interesting expereince when surfing the web to find two international sites (German and French) with one of my pictures. The foal was the first Black Delight foal in the US. Not only did they lift the picture without asking…they also copyrighted it like it was there picture!!! I was pretty annoyed…but what is there to do? Not much.

[back_in_the_saddle]

[QUOTE=hluing;5423502]
I had an interesting expereince when surfing the web to find two international sites (German and French) with one of my pictures. The foal was the first Black Delight foal in the US. Not only did they lift the picture without asking…they also copyrighted it like it was there picture!!! I was pretty annoyed…but what is there to do? Not much.[/QUOTE]

Is there a way to watermark a picture electronically where it takes a password to use the picture?

[TouchstoneAcres]

[QUOTE=rugbygirl;5414771]
Before you get too angry and start burning bridges, there are a few pieces of information that I would try to get, in your place.

1. Is it possible this was a photo taken by the stallion owner, or some agent of the stallion owner at a public event?

2. Is it possible this was a photo taken by a professional with whom the stallion owner may have made arrangements?

3. Is it possible that the stallion owner made at least a reasonable attempt to contact you first?

–

The answers to these questions would definitely be worth a few phone calls/voice mails to me. Email is never a guaranteed form of communication.

Also, you kind of jumped right off the deep end by posting all the info required to identify the stallion owner, when there are still multiple perfectly reasonable scenarios available to explain this. In the end, it amounts to a courtesy “violation”…at very worst a copyright violation that is kind of rampant in advertising everywhere (use of website photos.) That kind of violation is so prevalent in North America, it is virtually an accepted norm at this point. I do not feel that this universally taints someone’s business ethics, particularly since you apparently already satisfactorily concluded a contract arrangement with them.[/QUOTE]

If it is her photo, taken by her, there is no explanation that could possibly carry any weight. It is illegal, period. I can’t believe how loose people are about others’ property and rights. There is absolutely no excuse and they can be sued if you feel like pursing it. Ask people familiar with copy right law, not horse people for ways of dealing with it short of suing. You could probably start with a registered letter requesting no further use of the photo and some means of correcting it such as an ad captioning the photo with credit to you in the next publication. There nay be no financial damages but it is wrong and must be corrected. If not enforced you lose ground.

edited to add-glad it is settled amicably. Correcting it for the future is the goal and best solution for all. I still say every use should have permission. I ask before I post to my web site and before using in ads, every time.

[Barbara_F]

Who took the photo?

[M_O_Connor]

[QUOTE=Kyzteke;5414838]
Totally this! I think the OP might be missing the Forest for the Trees…[/QUOTE]

Uh, yes, definitely.

110%.

It could only be good for the stallion, and good for the young horse owner.

The only downside is to the photographer, and even that’s not certain.

If your business is photography, well there might be a slight point to being annoyed. But if your business is breeding, this whole complaint makes NO iota of sense.

[system]

thanks for share good sharing