where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
larger picture
farm5.static.flickr.com/4146/5056929864_814822cd05_b.jpg
In Hindustan Times Delhi ,5th October Page 23
its there in Hindustan times too.
epaper.hindustantimes.com/PUBLICATIONS//HT/HD/2010/10/05/...
AND Times of India ,Delhi -5th October page NO27.
I know many will suggest me suing CWG OC or their media agency ,but filling cases here isn't easy .I'm trying to contact CWG organizing committee
That has to be infuriating. I remembered a thread on this that came up a little while back. Check it out here:
This is exactly why you should only upload low resolution photos online. A watermark protects nothing. As in this case they just placed a "decal" over yours. Good luck, but even if they would have paid you to begin with they wouldn't have paid you much if at all.
I'm an event photographer and all I can tell you is how it is in the United States. An event promoter or organizer has every right to use any picture taken of their event, unless they are trying to sell the photo.
Bland is right. Most events, at least in North American, own the rights to any photos or video taken during said event. Without a press pass you have no rights to the image.
Bland and PBPM
Are you guys sure about that? Seems like a blatant copyright infringement.
How would it even work? Unless it's printed so on the invitation card or ticket I don't see how a publication/promoter could just use your photo like that without first notifying you in any way.
I don't know maybe I am wrong. I
Well,I'm allowed to take my camera and click still images of the event ,but its only for personal ,private or non commercial use .this is written on the back side of the ticket) .it doesn't say it gives them right to use my images for advertisement eg using it for selling tickets etc.
Abhinav said:
Well,I'm allowed to take my camera and click still images of the event ,but its only for personal ,private or non commercial use .this is written on the back side of the ticket) .it doesn't say it gives them right to use my images for advertisement eg using it for selling tickets etc.
Exactly. Hosting the image on flickr might have been a mistake though. Make sure that you have your licencing set to "all rights reserved." Otherwise they could have used it if you have it under creative commons license.
poster said:
Bland and PBPMAre you guys sure about that? Seems like a blatant copyright infringement.
How would it even work? Unless it's printed so on the invitation card or ticket I don't see how a publication/promoter could just use your photo like that without first notifying you in any way.
I don't know maybe I am wrong. I
Have you ever watched any kind of sporting event? At the end they'll say it was a copyright presentation, and not because the broadcast company owned the rights, but because the event (Sports league) owns the rights to the presentation. The broadcaster pays for the rights to broadcast. The same goes for anyone at any kind of sporting event, without a press pass you have no rights to the images.
PB PM said:
Have you ever watched any kind of sporting event? At the end they'll say it was a copyright presentation, and not because the broadcast company owned the rights, but because the event (Sports league) owns the rights to the presentation. The broadcaster pays for the rights to broadcast. The same goes for anyone at any kind of sporting event, without a press pass you have no rights to the images.
Hmm... I never noticed that.
Abhinav , is there any chance that the newspaper photo may not be yours? Can't it be taken by someone sitting whereabouts you were - a few rows up,down right left etc ?. I'm sorry but it is quite possible that you were not the only one shooting at that exact moment . It is also pointless of an Indian newspaper to bother stealing an image when they probably have many photographers there in the middle of the action .
While watching sports on TV , surely some of you have noticed how many flashes burst at the same time among the crowd when the camera shows the spectators .
The exposure is quite different in the 2 photos . The newspaper photo has lost details on the dark stadium top where as yours seem perfectly exposed . The newspaper photo also looks like a high ISO shot considering the noise it overall has.
It is best to check some ratios and angles carefully to be sure the shot is yours.
-----
EDIT : I did some and here is what I found .
You have posted your image about 11.9-12% larger than the newspaper image - I reached that figure by just by measuring the helium balloon from one end to other in each photo. This ratio should be consistent everywhere in the photo .
Then I measured the distances in the 2 photos between the top of the helium balloon and a certain point of the stadium top directly above it . And the ratio of the 2 distances is %13.7 .
I'm sorry but the newspaper PHOTO IS NOT YOURS . It has been taken by someone sitting a few rows above you . ( your angle between top of helium balloon and top of stadium is larger than his )
I posted my response also on the Flickr topic and Abhinav indicated that he took the newspaper shot with an angle and that's why the distances are different in each photo .
One, the distance measured on a plane would not change even if he shot the newspaper photo with an angle
Two - even if it did - with the only possible angle , the distance would look GREATER on the newspaper shot . However , the distance ( from top of balloon to stadium top ) is actually SMALLER in the paper shot .
He would have had to lean over the newspaper and shoot backwards with a NEGATIVE angle to get the balloon-roof distance to look the way it looks ( smaller than original ) on his shot .
I say it is False Alarm ... But I will apologize if he can prove me wrong.
Paperman said:
Abhinav , is there any chance that the newspaper photo may not be yours?
I think what you're seeing is the person that created the ad altered Abhinav's picture to fit the format of their ad. You may be correct but that's how it looks to me.
It's just sad Abhinav wasn't given credit for the picture because it's an incredible picture he shot.
PB PM said:
Have you ever watched any kind of sporting event? At the end they'll say it was a copyright presentation, and not because the broadcast company owned the rights, but because the event (Sports league) owns the rights to the presentation. The broadcaster pays for the rights to broadcast. The same goes for anyone at any kind of sporting event, without a press pass you have no rights to the images.
Exactly and even with a press pass you have to agree to the broadcaster/organizers terms, what ever it may be.
The only exception to this that I have seen is a band that has hired a photographer to shoot them at a event. In this case the band and the photographer are the only ones with rights to those photos, if the band has it written in their contract with the organizer.
PB PM said:
Have you ever watched any kind of sporting event? At the end they'll say it was a copyright presentation, and not because the broadcast company owned the rights, but because the event (Sports league) owns the rights to the presentation. The broadcaster pays for the rights to broadcast. The same goes for anyone at any kind of sporting event, without a press pass you have no rights to the images.
How can you copyright a live sports game? It's not fixed in a medium. You can copyright a recording of it, but the live play itself?
<b>I have been contacted by the agency who posted this ad in the newspaper .now they want to settle this up .this proves image is mine </b>.
let see how it goes .
Wow ...
The comment that I made in Flickr and the one afterwards with all ratio calculations showing the newspaper photo is taken from a different angle , and that it is not the same photo has been ERASED .
I wasn't aware that could be done :-) ! ! ! Just proves there is something you worry about Abhinav .
Contact the advertising agency and they will tell you what I said ...
I'd appreciate if anyone could visit the flickr link above and copy my replies that I wrote above ....
Well , I'd do it myself but somehow I'm not allowed to reply to his topic :-). I guess he banned me !
Paperman said:
Wow ...The comment that I made in Flickr and the one afterwards with all ratio calculations showing the newspaper photo is taken from a different angle , and that it is not the same photo has been ERASED .
I wasn't aware that could be done :-) ! ! ! Just proves there is something you worry about Abhinav .
Contact the advertising agency and they will tell you what I said ...
I'd appreciate if anyone could visit the flickr link above and copy my replies that I wrote above ....
Well , I'd do it myself but somehow I'm not allowed to reply to his topic :-). I guess he banned me !
I don't want any controversy when media agency has contacted me and told me they used my picture for the ad and they are ready to compensate me for the same .
you're allowed to post ,but please refrain from creating undue trouble for me :(
Paperman you are way off. I have no idea what you are measuring but you are comparing an "original" to a photo of a photo printed in a newspaper. Its the same photo. Just look at how all of the shadows, light patterns, and people are identical. Of course the "exposure" is different, its a cropped reproduction printed on paper! As for you comments on flickr being erased i dont understand why that upsets you. Abhinav has a right to delete whatever he wants for whatever reason. It proves nothing and you give off the wrong impression of yourself by complaining about it here.
As for the copyright, not sure about Indian law but live events can be copyrighted. However that does not give organizers the right to steal images off line of their events. You are not agreeing to give up your rights. You just cant turn around and sell your photos of the event for profit. Same goes for telecast. A production company cant take your video footage without your consent but they can sue you if you post the entire event online or sell DVD copies for profit.
Abhinav did nothing wrong by posting these pictures online for personal use. If he were selling prints of this photo then he might have a problem. Besides this photo was stolen by a newspaper and not the event organizer. So whether he agreed to somekind of copyright release by buying a ticket to this event it would have been with the event organizers and not with the newspaper.
I have compared RATIOS in both pictures - not dimensions . Wait an hour or two and I will explain it with drawings .
In the meantime , just try to figure out why there is more space ( than the crop ratio between the 2 photos ) between top of balloon and a certain point on top of roof .
Abhinav said:
I don't want any controversy when media agency has contacted me and told me they used my picture for the ad and they are ready to compensate me for the same .
Why would there be a CONTRAVERSORY when you are 100% sure it is your photo and you can verify this by submitting the original & EXIF ? Why worry about it ?
Paperman said:
I have compared RATIOS in both pictures - not dimensions . ...
Ratio measurement means nothing on its own.
Did you compare the geometry of objects between the two photos (the ringed floor is an obvious place to start) to demonstrate there was not a geometric transform (ie aspect ratio change or intentional perspective distortion) before measuring ratios and assuming a common surface?
Paperman said:
In the meantime , just try to figure out why there is more space ( than the crop ratio between the 2 photos ) between top of balloon and a certain point on top of roof .
If my hunch is right my above point addresses this.
Paperman said:
Why would there be a CONTRAVERSORY when you are 100% sure it is your photo and you can verify this by submitting the original & EXIF ? Why worry about it ?
It is spelled CONTROVERSY. If you're going to YELL at least SPELL. And the OP's desire to control the tone of the conversation is his business, not yours.
Niko, right, I agree with you that you can copyright a live event. I've no doubt that a theatrical play can be copyrighted. What I am questioning is whether you can copyright the "live play" of a sports game. It's not entirely like a theatrical play, the content of which is fixed in a written manuscript and then the manuscript is performed. Perhaps it can be argued that running plays out of a play-book is performing a copyrighted work? Wondering if anyone is aware of the answer to this?
This topic has been closed to new replies.
