Photographs by Ed Hamlin at Believe Fotografie

From the Blog

[singlepic id=1044 w=520 h=440 mode=watermark float=] 

I was recently asked some questions from members of ACFW (American Christian Fiction Writers) about TOS (terms of service) on blog sites like blogger, and Word Press. I decided to do a little investigative work and began reading the terms of service at various sites and some of the wording began to be troubling. (I am not an attorney nor am I offering any form of legal advice.)

Some help came from an article I had recently read over at my favorite blog A Photo Editor by Rob Haggart. I wish I had booked marked what I read but found it after rereading a half dozen posts. Rob has had several posts on the topic of copyright infringement and referenced other posts one being Photo Attorney.

What I read for the most part at every site concerns me because I work hard to create images and I don’t want to give away my IP rights (Intellectual Property: the new words for what you create ) just because I put it on the web via Facebook, a blogger blog, WordPress, Twitter, etc. I have read, re-read, and compiled the following information for you to decide on your own what is safe to put on the web through a site that is not specifically owned by you through the purchase of webhosting services, etc. I have included links to all of the referenced Terms, Terms of Service.

What gives credence to my concern is the article by Carolyn E. Wright’s post on her blog Photo Attorney. The primary focus was Facebook’s Terms as they are excerpted here. (more…)

Lately there has been a lot of comment and additions to the article at PDN regarding the similarities of a several photographers work. I have chimed in previously on this with a post about my thoughts on the subject. I decide to do a little bit more research on the subject and it has some varied viewpoints by those commenting and authors.

When you consider copyright law and the possibility of a rights violation, it just doesn’t apply.  None of the photographers are using previous works as their own. If you look at some of the images in question, you see similarities but then again each is unique. There is a question about the possibility that it may be plagiarism.  I again don’t see any legal standing from my lay viewpoint since I am a photographer.

 [singlepic id=477 w=420 h=340 mode=watermark float=center]

First off if you look at things from a viewpoint of when Monet and Renoir sat side-by-side painting the same scene with very different results. Yes if you look at the paintings, they are similar but the colors are different. I can be seen how each artist or in this case a photographer (sorry not all are artists) definitely has a different eye for the scene than other photographers.

I find it sad that outside of, learning or influencing a photographer’s voice and artistic eye that they would use a similar work (that is similar to another photographers publish or displayed work). I find that is shows a lack of creativity and originality. If that means taking it to the next level as it should be, then why not do it? Instead, it seems being lazy is the way to go.

You can read more at Photo Ramblings,  The Online Photographer or  Chris Combs . I want to thank Jörg Colberg and his attention on the subject at his blog Conscientious.