wilfredo Posted August 10, 2008 Share #41 Posted August 10, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) About these copyright laws concerning the tower, does that also apply to painters who paint at night? Life seems to get more and more complicated for no real apparent reason. I think photographers are going to have to start organizing lobby groups to protect the profession from idiotic nonsense laws. Cheers, Wilfredo Benitez-Rivera Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 10, 2008 Posted August 10, 2008 Hi wilfredo, Take a look here UFO over Paris. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
SJP Posted August 10, 2008 Share #42 Posted August 10, 2008 An eaven easier strategy is for photographers to collectively ignore such rules and regulations. They cannot possibly bring 100.000+ people per year to court. This is called the voice of the people - well tried and tested. Meanwhile my legally informed wife tells me that she would doubt if the US (or elsewhere) courts would take any action on an Eiffel Tower illumination breach of copyright charge. Apart from more burning issues requiring their attention (murder, theft, impeachement), one might argue that if they do not want the thing photographed they should pack it in opaque plastic (or whatever suites your fancy) so that such offences are not possible. Moreover how is one supposed to know about this copyright thing - is this obvious to the beholder, written via a lasershow, attached to your camera instruction manual? I think not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 10, 2008 Share #43 Posted August 10, 2008 It seems indeed a difficult copyright to enforce. In this age of cellphone cameras and weblogs there must be any number of infringements all ove the Internet. Added to which: The main artwork seems to be the colour of the light illuminating the tower. Postprocessing is certain to change the exact colour, making the photograph a new and original work of art and thus exempt.It is even possible to take a 50 year old night photograph af the tower and change the colours to approach the effect we see now. Is that a breach of Copyright? I doubt it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 10, 2008 Share #44 Posted August 10, 2008 They're not looking to chase you or me, or any one else who takes a photograph for their own enjoyment. They're after people who stand to make money from publishing images of the tower. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 10, 2008 Share #45 Posted August 10, 2008 I agree, Steve. Post # 17 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pierovitch Posted August 11, 2008 Share #46 Posted August 11, 2008 You should always check the fine print Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/59658-ufo-over-paris/?do=findComment&comment=625356'>More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted August 11, 2008 Share #47 Posted August 11, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) .. it would indeed being farcical if you would get copyright granted to you for your next photo book in the UK, and I could just buy a copy, reproduce it and sell it in Italy without any consequence. Wouldn't it? The copyright protections for Italians in Italy would be agreeably similar to the copyright protections to a UK photographer in UK law; there would be no conflict in any agreement on copyright between Italian and UK law in this example [and others cited earlier in the thread]. The issue of night Eiffel photographs is only special because of radical differences of law between France and the UK [and presumably other countries who are signatories to the same copyright agreement]. you can believe what you choose to believe Vieri - It really is not a matter of belief for me, I completely understand your certainty, I simply do not share it because regardless of what appears to be signed up to, for me; a central question still has to be answered: Can the law of another country take precedence in the UK's courts over UK law? The answer to that question will determine my belief. For the record I am one of those photographers who has stood up and fought my battle over copyright protection, I have campaigned on the subject and it cost me. ................ Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 11, 2008 Share #48 Posted August 11, 2008 Can the law of another country take precedence in the UK's courts over UK law? Yes it can - provided there are international treaties - or EU law- that provide a legal basis. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhulsenbeek Posted August 11, 2008 Share #49 Posted August 11, 2008 Yes it can - provided there are international treaties - or EU law- that provide a legal basis. True, but rather not the law of (one) another country, but - as a rule of thumb - international treaties or law-systems based on those, like EU Law. For copyright: the Berne Convention. See: Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.