It's not that I'd just want to be paid for it. I feel that I'd be entitled to be paid for it if the person using it is making money off it.
If it's being used just to show a nice car on a website, that's fine. I don't care. But when it's being used to promote a product, that's where the money comes into play.
Wild Weasel wrote:It's not that I'd just want to be paid for it. I feel that I'd be entitled to be paid for it if the person using it is making money off it.
If it's being used just to show a nice car on a website, that's fine. I don't care. But when it's being used to promote a product, that's where the money comes into play.
Exactly, and they don't even sell anything on their website from my car, pathetic
Meckster wrote:Wild Weasel wrote:It's not that I'd just want to be paid for it. I feel that I'd be entitled to be paid for it if the person using it is making money off it.
If it's being used just to show a nice car on a website, that's fine. I don't care. But when it's being used to promote a product, that's where the money comes into play.
Exactly, and they don't even sell anything on their website from my car, pathetic
ROFLMAO thats even funnier that they dont sell any of it. Even in its orginal form
I don't think this company cares what images it uses. If you look at some of the pics, some are watermarked by other companies. I.E. VIS Racing.
Is this a legit company out of courosity?
I'm not sure if they are even legit or not, hell ive seen Rick Howes car on there
Quote:
That's worth money. That would be like you putting up an ad with a big picture of Michael Jordan telling everyone to go to carcustoms.net. It's illegal. Basically, Meckster is legally entitled to a cut of all profits gained as a result of people following that link.
Sorry to see this happen to someone else. This has happened to me twice that I know of.. And as far as I know there is nothing you can do about it except to ask the company not to use your pics.. unfortunatley when you place pics on the web with such free sites as Cardomain, Your pics are free to anyone who wants them.. and there is nothing you can do about other than take you pics off there site. unfortunately these sites do not have measures in place to protect your pics from piracy from Vendors and companies who might be selling the the same products that are on your car..
CarbonCav (Mavrik24) wrote:Quote:
That's worth money. That would be like you putting up an ad with a big picture of Michael Jordan telling everyone to go to carcustoms.net. It's illegal. Basically, Meckster is legally entitled to a cut of all profits gained as a result of people following that link.
Sorry to see this happen to someone else. This has happened to me twice that I know of.. And as far as I know there is nothing you can do about it except to ask the company not to use your pics.. unfortunatley when you place pics on the web with such free sites as Cardomain, Your pics are free to anyone who wants them.. and there is nothing you can do about other than take you pics off there site. unfortunately these sites do not have measures in place to protect your pics from piracy from Vendors and companies who might be selling the the same products that are on your car..
Your wrong it does not make them free for the public the law states you dont have to say the pictures are copyrighted.
its happend to me twice, its not cool. They arre basically saying they did the work on this car and if customers want similar work to come to them. Totally dishonest practice.
1996 Chevrolet Cavalier SOLD | 2002 BMW 330i SOLD | 2004 BMW 645i
The worst part is if you are sponsored or got some sponsorship help from another company that made the kit then you see your car in another companies ad for that kit. This happened to me in PAS magazine. They removed it right away after I contacted them. I didn't need no sponsors to get mad at me.
-Chris
<img src="http://memimage.cardomain.com/member_images/1/web/565000-565999/565234_2.jpg">
Andrew V wrote:...Your wrong it does not make them free for the public the law states you dont have to say the pictures are copyrighted....
We've been over this before and what you say is simply not true. I suspect that you're passing off heresay as fact. Please provide documented proof to support your claim. I would be interested to see it.
"Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines." -- Steven Wright
well i just wanted to say..great looking car Meckster i have been watching your car for many months.. and it looks great. as for that no talent ass clown that said he would of used a better car.. he needs to wear he's ass for a hat. i come on the org. to learn not to make fun of people.
KreepyGuy wrote:Andrew V wrote:...Your wrong it does not make them free for the public the law states you dont have to say the pictures are copyrighted....
We've been over this before and what you say is simply not true. I suspect that you're passing off heresay as fact. Please provide documented proof to support your claim. I would be interested to see it.
Yes... we've been over it several times and shown that what he said IS in fact true.
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html
Read through that.
Ok I read this article and so some of it may be true.. but I ask you this How Many people on here do you think Copyrights their pics or thinks to put a C in a circle on them? Thats just crazy..Further more like I said earlier there isn't much you can do about it because I re-assure you that it would cost a whole lot more in court costs than you would ever be rewarded to do something about it..
What are we gonna have to do next , Start copyrighting our hair cuts and the way we dress.. or how about the way we drive our cars that would be a good one.. this is crazy..
Good find WW. I should have been more specific because that's not really what I was looking for. I'm more interested to see actual legislation that clearly defines that end-users are protected with regards to personal photos on the Internet. Civil court cases that established legal precedents, etc.
Quote:
...Note that granting something to the public domain is a complete abandonment of all rights. You can't make something "PD for non-commercial use." If your work is PD, other people can even modify one byte and put their name on it...
Quote:
...If it looks copyrighted, you should assume it is. This applies to pictures, too. You may not scan pictures from magazines and post them to the net, and if you come upon something unknown, you shouldn't post that either...
Quote:
...and there can still be serious damages if you hurt the commercial value of the property...
Quote:
...While copyright law makes it technically illegal to reproduce almost any new creative work (other than under fair use) without permission, if the work is unregistered and has no real commercial value, it gets very little protection. The author in this case can sue for an injunction against the publication, actual damages from a violation, and possibly court costs. Actual damages means actual money potentially lost by the author due to publication, plus any money gained by the defendant. But if a work has no commercial value, such as a typical E-mail message or conversational USENET posting, the actual damages will be zero. Only the most vindictive (and rich) author would sue when no damages are possible, and the courts don't look kindly on vindictive plaintiffs, unless the defendants are even more vindictive...
For the record, I actually agree with those who say that you're entitled to compensation if someone uses photos of yours for commercial gain. However, I also believe that you'd have a pretty hard time winning anything in court over photos of your car that you've previously posted to the Internet.
Unless you can convince a judge that those pictures are creative works which have lost potential value due to their unauthorized publication, I think it would ultimately prove to be a waste of time and money to try and run the distance in a civil dispute.
"Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines." -- Steven Wright
KreepyGuy wrote:Unless you can convince a judge that those pictures are creative works which have lost potential value due to their unauthorized publication, I think it would ultimately prove to be a waste of time and money to try and run the distance in a civil dispute.
Note that this isn't only an issue of the photos themselves. You can't just wait for me to park somewhere and then take your own pics of my car and use them for commercial purposes either. Just like I can't go to a hockey game and take a pic of Jerome Iginla and use that to promote a product. In those cases, even though you own the picture itself you still cannot use it for commercial purposes without the permission of the subject. Of course, I can't go to a hockey game at all this year... but that's a whole different issue.
This is about misrepresentation and you'll find that it's generally the companies you DON'T want to be associated with that are doing it. Those people respect can simply ask and get permission or have their own sponsored cars that they use for this stuff.
I think it would be awesome if my car appeared in internet advertisements
