Take it easy, it's only a couple of pictures of your friggin car....what's the big deal? Ok, so you didn't get the $$ they said. How many people on here have gone to car shows & taken pictures of the cars & not asked permission to post them on here & other websites? I guess we figure that since they put the cars in shows they expect people to take pictures of them. Well, a lot of them also sell pics & calenders, so they make money off of the pictures & you could say by not purchasing their pics & calenders we are hurting there business. Ok, not really. But dude, It's not like they posted naked pictures of your sister, it's just your god damn cavalier! Be proud they liked it enough to post it. You should at least ask them for credit so everyone knows it's your car.

I think the problem is that he paid a lot for the parts and now a company is using pictures that he took time to take for them and giving him nothing in return...

I agree. It's a matter of principle at this point. I think if this company wants to use pictures of his car to promote their kit then he deserves some compensation for it. Whether it's the previously agreed compensation or it's free parts or whatever, he deserves SOMETHING. Granted, the poster of this thread won't get off scot-free either...you should have gotten paid FIRST. This is no different than an eBay transaction where someone would expect you to send your money before they would send you the product. Putting that aside for now though, there's still a problem with a company knowingly using images against the will of the original photographer.

I just don't buy the notion that a company that has built "so many kits" and done "so much testing" on "so many cars" has to use install pictures without someone's consent. Are you going to try to convince me that out of all the installs and testing that they've done that nobody even had so much as a camera phone handy? It just makes no sense and I just don't buy it. Something there doesn't add up.

SSAutoChrome is a company that, from what I can gather, already faces a bit of an uphill battle to regain a positive image with much of the J community. This doesn't seem like the path of least resistance for them to do it. That's whay I emailed them asking what was up. I'm genuinely interested on their side of the story and how they plan to address this. I just can't see that any company in their right mind would want immediate bad publicity of their business practices at a time when they're trying to put out a kit for the very cars that this website serves.

I'll keep everyone posted if I get a response.






09:f9:11:02:9d:74:e3:5b:d8:41:56:c5:63

98z24ns wrote:Take it easy, it's only a couple of pictures of your friggin car....what's the big deal? Ok, so you didn't get the $$ they said. How many people on here have gone to car shows & taken pictures of the cars & not asked permission to post them on here & other websites? I guess we figure that since they put the cars in shows they expect people to take pictures of them. Well, a lot of them also sell pics & calenders, so they make money off of the pictures & you could say by not purchasing their pics & calenders we are hurting there business. Ok, not really. But dude, It's not like they posted naked pictures of your sister, it's just your god damn cavalier! Be proud they liked it enough to post it. You should at least ask them for credit so everyone knows it's your car.

Don't take this too personally, but this is just plain ignorant.

You can take pics at a car show and display them all you want. You can't use them to promote your products though. Try going to a golf tournament, taking a pic of Tiger Woods, and then using that in a magazine ad for golf clubs. I think you might find out just how serious an issue it can be. Having someone use your car is the same thing. It's misrepresentation and it's illegal.

http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

Thanks for posting that WW, I decided to give up trying to help in this thread.


._____________________________.
Causa latet vis est notissima

DIY Clear 03+ Headlights

98z24ns wrote:Take it easy, it's only a couple of pictures of your friggin car....what's the big deal? Ok, so you didn't get the $$ they said. How many people on here have gone to car shows & taken pictures of the cars & not asked permission to post them on here & other websites? I guess we figure that since they put the cars in shows they expect people to take pictures of them. Well, a lot of them also sell pics & calenders, so they make money off of the pictures & you could say by not purchasing their pics & calenders we are hurting there business. Ok, not really. But dude, It's not like they posted naked pictures of your sister, it's just your god damn cavalier! Be proud they liked it enough to post it. You should at least ask them for credit so everyone knows it's your car.

Its about principle definately. Yes its just a cavalier but its also my hard work and the time taken to take the pics send the proper emails and have an agreement then get jacked at the end. its not a big deal to you cause you didnt have it done to you. They are using it on their website as a promotional tool and thats crap. If you dont see that then fine one jbo member not on my side no biggy but from the reply of this topic it seems that it is somewhat important to others so if you dont like it post elsewhere.



*2012 mazdaspeed3*

Ashley Becker wrote:I am in Law School and unless there is a contract then you have nothing. you can try top sue in civil court but is it worth $400 and the cost of their court fees plus if you lose you have to pay for the whole court cost. And your car isn't copy righted nor is anything you do on it. Email isn't a binding contract because you have no proof to who you were talking to and its all Hearsay in the court of law unless there was a signature attached to the email of the person you were dealing with. Take the FBI Virus scam, someone pretending to be the FBI and as soon as you open up the email, your computer get a virus, now people can't sue the FBI for someone falsifying who they really were. It could have been someone pretending to be them. Also, if you have picture posted ANYWHERE on the Internet then you aren't protected, if you don't want people using your car then put a water-marker on your pictures. My advise is suck it up, you can tell the company that you contacted a lawyer and that they need to pay you or remove them, it scares them because they know NOTHING about LAW. I have had to do it several times for my car and everyone gets their pics stolen, its part of the Internet, just like file sharing. My advise don't go to court unless you have a contract and a judge and jury can find them guilty upon reasonable doubt.

Wow, that is completely wrong in nearly every facet imaginable.

Copyright Law currently is based on the 1976 Copyright Act. All Copyright actions arise under this statue, not Contract law. Section 102 extends protection to all listed works, which includes pictorial works. The only things that you will need to show is that those pictures are yours (note: not of your car, but that you took them) and that they were using them without permission.

You do not need to register an image in order for it to be protected, from the moment that it is fixed in a tangible medium, it has Copyright protection. However, in order to pursue infringement, that picture must be registered with the Copyright Office. If you are serious about pursuing this, you should speak with an attorney (preferably one with an IP - Intellectual Property background, as Ashley has shown, even one with a legal background may not have the requisite knowledge to deal with IP issues).

If you have any questions, feel free to PM me. I can't promise an immediate response, but I should be able to check it periodically during the day.

Ashley, if you are going to be giving legal advice before finishing law school, perhaps you should ensure that the advice you give is correct. Failing to do so could leave you vulnerable for repercussions from both the person you gave advice to, as well as the state bar for practicing law without a license.

although i am a Muslim, hurray for PORK !! and ww and jimmy z and all the others who say fight it,. i agree wit WW taken pics of cars for a site and using the pic to promote your product to different things, also as jimmyz said there should be a sort of compensation for the pics, cause he did all the work, but the fact they could not provide at least on pic of there own installs is fishy hmmm .... wonder wht they will say, but good luck brother

PCS just dropped a big hammer hehe

I <3 teh law boy

PCS,

I'm curious as to what your credentials are since you are supposedly giving legal advice.

Unless you state that this is your "professional opinion" in the form of implying or outwardly expressing that you are indeed a professional, you cannot be held responsible for giving a wrong legal opinion. Ashley is just fine in what she is saying as long as she doesn't say it's a "professional opinion."

This is my non-professional opinion

I've worked at an intellectual property lawfirm for the past six years. I will be entering law school Fall 2k6. Currently, I'm taking a couple business law classes as I finish up my computer engineering degree. I will offer my non-professional advice and opinion on this situation later tonight when I get more time to type it out.

For the most part, Brett and Ashley are both right. You're just taking different approaches to the problem. It's a matter of what the kid wants to resolve. Do you want contractual performance met or do you want to uphold the rights you have to your pictures?

I'll type more a little later.


<a href="http://www.j-body.org/members/mrpute"><img src="http://www.j-bom.com/images/sigs/putesig.jpg">

Pute,

My warning to Ashley was merely one of caution, not of absolute discretion. She is not completely covered when she prefaces her statement by stating that she is only in law school. Since professional conduct and ethics is controlled by the state bar, not all jurisdictions are the same; however there are some states that allow the presumption that the law student is viewed as a professional by those they may be intentionally (or unintentionally) advising because it is known that the student has undergone or is currently undergoing a legal education (and thus should have a higher level of legal knowledge).

As for my credentials, I am a second-year law student at Indiana University School of Law in Bloomington. My area of focus is intellectual property, however I recently decided to focus exclusively on Patent Law for the remainder of my legal education. Prior to this decision, I took Law School-Level classes on all forms of Intellectual Property, but focused on Copyright Law in addition to Patent Law.

pcs layin down the law !!!!!!!!!!

Ok this is just going too far... You guys are fighting with each other over someone elses problem...

The guy asked for help.

I say go to a lawyer now, pay the $100-$150 or whatever and get the lawyer to CALL or WRITE a letter to the company.

No one on here can solve this problem... I WISH we could but really doubt it.

If you know someone who is friends with a lawyer or something try and get "free" advice first, then find a good lawyer.


I really wish you the best of luck in getting your money.
Please keep us updated.

Mr. Pute wrote:For the most part, Brett and Ashley are both right. You're just taking different approaches to the problem. It's a matter of what the kid wants to resolve. Do you want contractual performance met or do you want to uphold the rights you have to your pictures?

I would disagree.

In his initial post he said that he wanted the pictures down and maybe in addition to that some $$$ for his "pain and stuff." The introduction of any contract issues (IMO) would be an extraneous issue to raise. Even if contract issues were raised and even if he won, he would still need to show that they were violating his Copyrights or else they would not be required to remove the photos (which is his main goal). In the alternative, both objectives could be obtained by solely exploring his Copyrights. He could force them to remove the images and quite possibly earn compensation for the time they have been used.

To the original poster: perhaps you now see why I originally suggested you see an attorney. There are many ways that you could take, but no one on here will take them for you. If you see an IP attorney, they could give you both guidance, as well as the possiblity of an actual recovery, instead of the banter that we're going through here (for as fun as it is to go back and forth like this, no one here is going to be able to do anything about this at all).

In my professional opinion (haha) i think i would rather just have the pictures off their website because i feel that my hard work is worth money but persuing it in a legal matter just seems like a big head ache and im o so busy all the tiem and i dont have time for that. Im just upset that i was decieved and i wont let it ever again i guess. But to all of you with the legal jargon and what not esp. pork man i appreciate it. I may look around for a lawyer with IP experience in my free time. Thanks all of you. Even to the schmuck who gave his two cents about it not being a big deal.


*2012 mazdaspeed3*

PCS,

Agreed on all counts. I didn't have time to go back and review what his objectives were, for I was heading off to my last class of the day.

Also, nice credentials. Hopefully I'll be in the same position a couple years from now.




<a href="http://www.j-body.org/members/mrpute"><img src="http://www.j-bom.com/images/sigs/putesig.jpg">

also if you go to whois.com, and enter 'ssautochrome' go threw a few steps you can get the admin and technical contact info. May be worth dropping an e-mail to them also.

damn i get bored...


Registrant:
SS Auto Chrome

5012 Swisswood Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27613
United States

Registered through: Site-Maker
Domain Name: SSAUTOCHROME.COM
Created on: 05-Apr-01
Expires on: 05-Apr-06
Last Updated on: 24-Mar-05

Administrative Contact:
Burnham, Rita admin@site-maker.com
Site-Maker
2708 Foothill Blvd Suite 407
La Crescenta, California 91214
United States
8182487445
Technical Contact:
Burnham, Gordon gordon@site-maker.com
Site-Maker
2708 Foothill Blvd Suite 407
La Crescenta, California 91214
United States
8182487445

Domain servers in listed order:
NS01.SITE-MAKER.COM
NS02.SITE-MAKER.COM


Registry Status: REGISTRAR-LOCK

Pork Chop Sandwiches!!! wrote:

Ashley Becker wrote:I am in Law School and unless there is a contract then you have nothing. you can try top sue in civil court but is it worth $400 and the cost of their court fees plus if you lose you have to pay for the whole court cost. And your car isn't copy righted nor is anything you do on it. Email isn't a binding contract because you have no proof to who you were talking to and its all Hearsay in the court of law unless there was a signature attached to the email of the person you were dealing with. Take the FBI Virus scam, someone pretending to be the FBI and as soon as you open up the email, your computer get a virus, now people can't sue the FBI for someone falsifying who they really were. It could have been someone pretending to be them. Also, if you have picture posted ANYWHERE on the Internet then you aren't protected, if you don't want people using your car then put a water-marker on your pictures. My advise is suck it up, you can tell the company that you contacted a lawyer and that they need to pay you or remove them, it scares them because they know NOTHING about LAW. I have had to do it several times for my car and everyone gets their pics stolen, its part of the Internet, just like file sharing. My advise don't go to court unless you have a contract and a judge and jury can find them guilty upon reasonable doubt.

Wow, that is completely wrong in nearly every facet imaginable.

Copyright Law currently is based on the 1976 Copyright Act. All Copyright actions arise under this statue, not Contract law. Section 102 extends protection to all listed works, which includes pictorial works. The only things that you will need to show is that those pictures are yours (note: not of your car, but that you took them) and that they were using them without permission.

You do not need to register an image in order for it to be protected, from the moment that it is fixed in a tangible medium, it has Copyright protection. However, in order to pursue infringement, that picture must be registered with the Copyright Office. If you are serious about pursuing this, you should speak with an attorney (preferably one with an IP - Intellectual Property background, as Ashley has shown, even one with a legal background may not have the requisite knowledge to deal with IP issues).

If you have any questions, feel free to PM me. I can't promise an immediate response, but I should be able to check it periodically during the day.

Ashley, if you are going to be giving legal advice before finishing law school, perhaps you should ensure that the advice you give is correct. Failing to do so could leave you vulnerable for repercussions from both the person you gave advice to, as well as the state bar for practicing law without a license.

Wow imagine PCS coming in on a post i made and bashing me, nothing new and i didn't give legal advice so get over yourself buddy and i would like to see legal action taken for giving an opinion over the same thing that has happened to me with a company using my photos in a Super Street magazine ad and since my photos were on a public website aka cardomain.com, not my own domain like bobmull.com, there was nothing that could be done about it, thats's not professional advice, its personal experience, so sue me.

Respooled2k3 : Good luck with your situation and by the way I did talk to a lawyer today at class about this and he said that it would be a hard case to take to court and try to make a case under a copy right law on a picture posted on a public website. Just wanted you to know that and good luck and i hope everything works out for you.

Oh one last thing to PCS as a law student you should know that there are several types of practices you can go into. I stated in this forum that my schooling doesn't go to far into depth with Internet related laws. Let me ask you something, how much do you know about Criminal Law and Forensic Science? Well my Bachelor degrees and Master degree are in CJ and FS so my field isn't the same as yours and I won't expect you to be able to know much about the CJ system and FS when your practice is intellectual property and Patent Law. And when I give an opinion based on experience that doesn't mean that i gave legal advice on a practice that I am not too familiar with. just as you are not familiar with CJ and FS practices right? You stated above "However, in order to pursue infringement, that picture must be registered with the Copyright Office" Which is why I told him that there wasn't much he could do since it wasn't copy righted and it was on a public website that doesn't protect the user when they post pics. And that was learned from experience. Well everyone have a nice night, its been nice chatting back and forth about the situation. Its always nice to hear other people's opinions.

JimmyZ wrote:Wow. Neutral corners, kids.

09:f9:11:02:9d:74:e3:5b:d8:41:56:c5:63

JimmyZ wrote:

JimmyZ wrote:Wow. Neutral corners, kids.

I'm fine, no corner for me, just sticking up for myself and i did so enough from me

nice to see some things never change gone for 6 months and this place is still a bitch fest.