My picture is on newspaper.

[ortega]

it is still unethical of them to use other people's hard work without at least asking permission or giving full credit

maybe in the future the number of press photographers will decrease

 

[scubagolfer]

I think it is a clear cut infringement of copyright. Facebook does not own the copyright, their clause is to protect themselves when they use anything for their own purposes and not when another party get from them.

With your nick as watermark on the picture .... SPH should at least have sought for your permission. Using it without asking is an infringement. You can just call a lawyer and give them a short brief and ask if there is a case. If you go to SPH, they will play poker with you .... will ask you to get lawyer, if really you get lawyer, then they pay .... this is a standard procedure for big corporations .....

 

[ortega]

I think it is a clear cut infringement of copyright. Facebook does not own the copyright, their clause is to protect themselves when they use anything for their own purposes and not when another party get from them.

With your nick as watermark on the picture .... SPH should at least have sought for your permission. Using it without asking is an infringement. You can just call a lawyer and give them a short brief and ask if there is a case. If you go to SPH, they will play poker with you .... will ask you to get lawyer, if really you get lawyer, then they pay .... this is a standard procedure for big corporations .....

just write to mediacorp lor

or stomp it

 

[Fallenphoenix]

TS, my advice- if u do email SPH, please include the appropriate CC recipients, namely their bosses (editors or higher), and relevant authorities to avoid field players from brushing this matter under the carpet like ur earlier tele-conversation. It is often that the immediate managers or 'responsibles' re the ones who want to cover up issues like this to avoid marring their performances.

 

[paesyl]

Read this..so gray.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-10165190-36.html

The way they stand now, Facebook's terms of service claim that the company does not have ownership over content, yet that it does have "an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (to)...use, copy, publish, stream, store, retain, publicly perform or display, transmit, scan, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works, and distribute" material as long as it doesn't violate the privacy preferences set by the user.

 

[Fallenphoenix]

U might want to say hello to ur local MP....

 

[blurry80]

My view is this, send them lawyer letter. Then they'll pay money to settle outside. Thats it. If lawyer thinks this case no chance then you lose money but learnt a lesson.

 

[blurry80]

To learn the lesson need to pay money agree?

 

[zac08]

Well, some questions here:
1) Did you water mark your image?
2) Did you legally copyright your image? (I don't think any of us here do in Singapore)
3) What resolution did you set when you up load onto the internet or facebook for this instance?

Just call them and they said that they can't give me money, they said if I want money they ask me to send a lawyer letter.

Ya I did water mark on my image, but I did not legally copyright my image.

Legally, the photo is copyright under your ownership once you took the photo. Only if you publish the photo in any public space with the legal disclaimers that it is for free and public usage, then anyone can legally use it without repercussions.

Go ahead and sue them. I would love to see them on the receiving end.

 

[moski77]

sorry to hijack this thread, as it kinda related-


Out of curiosity how about if SPH Berita Harian use my picture that given by a fellow writer but fail to credit my name, instead use writer's company name? Is this their standard practice? I have a few picture publish on paper (thought if I got few picture publish, I can use it as portfolio) but the problem is my name not credited. :cry:

 

[daredevil123]

This is terrible. SPH sucks. No ethics whatsoever and simply can't believe the arrogance... :thumbsd::thumbsd::thumbsd: Go to hell SPH! That is one big reason why our local media sucks so badly. Actions that make the audience disrespect them totally.

 

[sinned79]

Go ahead and sue them. I would love to see them on the receiving end.

ermm unless TS is very rich enough to play this lawsuit game. I will advise not to. They are a publishing firm, they will have all the time and money to play along with you.

 

[romeo tango]

maybe both of you can team up and go for it ?

 

[zac08]

sorry to hijack this thread, as it kinda related-


Out of curiosity how about if SPH Berita Harian use my picture that given by a fellow writer but fail to credit my name, instead use writer's company name? Is this their standard practice? I have a few picture publish on paper (thought if I got few picture publish, I can use it as portfolio) but the problem is my name not credited. :cry:

Check with them on where they got the picture and inform them that you are the legal owner of the photo. Where you go from there is another matter already.

 

[night86mare]

don't ask facebook, ask SPH to produce proof of right to use

but i remember somewhere something about of "fair use"
anyone knows more about it

this isn't the first time this has happened i think.

there was another emo guy ranting about this a while back... can't remember his name though.

i remember nothing came out of that case. no compensation, nothing.

nonetheless, think the attitude of the person talking to threadstarter is appalling if the attitude is "send us lawyer letter for money" - this is very , very high-handed.

 

[night86mare]

read this:

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=367494

 

[theRBK]

sorry to disappoint the TS, and as others have pointed out in other ways, Singapore's Copyright Act (Chapter 63) Section 37 Fair dealing for purpose of reporting current events clearly supports ST's use of the TS's image for reporting current events purposes...

on the reverse side, ST should not be able to claim that the TS has infringed it's copyright of the article by representing that at the start of this thread

unfortunate but true, the best way to protect your image is to watermark (not foolproof), embed copyright info in exif (can easily be removed), post as small an image as possible (a thin line to thread), and maybe to save it in as low quality a compression as you can tolerate (also a thin line)...

 

[night86mare]

unfortunate but true, the best way to protect your image is to watermark (not foolproof), embed copyright info in exif (can easily be removed), post as small an image as possible (a thin line to thread), and maybe to save it in as low quality a compression as you can tolerate (also a thin line)...

TS said he posted it on facebook only.

that compression is like, way sick, i guess the demand for IQ in newspapers isn't really that high. :bsmilie:

 

[Legoz]

Whats the deal, really?

 

[pinholecam]

sorry to disappoint the TS, and as others have pointed out in other ways, Singapore's Copyright Act (Chapter 63) Section 37 Fair dealing for purpose of reporting current events clearly supports ST's use of the TS's image for reporting current events purposes...

on the reverse side, ST should not be able to claim that the TS has infringed it's copyright of the article by representing that at the start of this thread

unfortunate but true, the best way to protect your image is to watermark (not foolproof), embed copyright info in exif (can easily be removed), post as small an image as possible (a thin line to thread), and maybe to save it in as low quality a compression as you can tolerate (also a thin line)...

Damn! That sucks :thumbsd:
:thumbsd: for SPH. (......Again....)

TS said he posted it on facebook only.

that compression is like, way sick, i guess the demand for IQ in newspapers isn't really that high. :bsmilie:

I thought its WanBao? Their standard very low one