Guest Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 So are you telling me not to trust Alamy? Not at all. Alamy is protected by the user agreement. What it tells you about licence type and releases isn't legally watertight permission to submit images containing IP you don't own. You don't own the copyright in the Star Wars or Batman images and you don't have permission from those who do. You therefore run a risk, at best of Alamy being asked to remove them, which it will, and at worst of legal action. Or as Martin says Alamy will take them down proactively to protect itself. I ask that because everybody here says me there is a risk while Alamy says me its safe as they have a special formula for people who sells images with IP without property releases Alamy also has an indemnity clause (quoted above) in the contract that you've agreed to. You understand what indemnity is, don't you? Anyways, you seem to be pretty determined, as Robert pointed... I'd ask Member Services at the very least. Next, I'd get an E&O liability insurance and incorporate the business - your liability risks are going to be high. GI I ve already ask them several times and they said me this is safe with the "RM licence/no property releases" attributes. I really dont know what to do... How does that work for the RF logo of Star Wars that you have in your port. It's a lawsuit waiting to happen. You really don't understand that you are treading over somebody's IP and they are people who like to sue, have a long history of doing so. Example of others musing over this. http://law.stackexchange.com/questions/3988/how-might-this-use-of-the-star-wars-logo-and-universe-be-legal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 GI I am just stating that he says he has created the vectors, therefore they are his images, just images of someone else's IP. If he has copied these images from elsewhere then submitted them as his own, then he is double risking. Jill There are copyrighted material inside my images but I created them. I didnt copy them. Not but you have used LFL's IP. I repeat, they do not appear to be transformative or parody and so the copyright exceptions probably don't apply. BTW 'copyright' is a noun, not a verb. May I suggest you do some research around the subject as you don't seem to appreciate some of the matters which should be the stock in trade of an image maker. LFL probably doesn't mind if you paint a stormtrooper on your bedroom wall or put an illustration in a post, but when you start licensing images , you're taking money out of its pocket, and it definitely does care about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edouardcoleman Posted December 8, 2015 Author Share Posted December 8, 2015 So are you telling me not to trust Alamy? Not at all. Alamy is protected by the user agreement. What it tells you about licence type and releases isn't legally watertight permission to submit images containing IP you don't own. You don't own the copyright in the Star Wars or Batman images and you don't have permission from those who do. You therefore run a risk, at best of Alamy being asked to remove them, which it will, and at worst of legal action. Or as Martin says Alamy will take them down proactively to protect itself. I ask that because everybody here says me there is a risk while Alamy says me its safe as they have a special formula for people who sells images with IP without property releases Alamy is not saying it's 'safe'. The 'formula' is a policy on licence type for images sold without releases. It has no relevance to the matter of IP ownership. You are almost certainly infringing LFL's copyright and its trademarks and registered designs. When I say "Alamy say me it's safe" I mean I ask them directly. It doesn t prove there are right but they said that to me. Why do they ask in the attributes: "Does this image contain property that needs a release for commercial use ?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edouardcoleman Posted December 8, 2015 Author Share Posted December 8, 2015 I ask Alamy again to look at this thread and give me a clear answer about that. I suppose its now a bit late and they will send me a mail tomorrow morning. BTW I m a english beginner, so please be cool. I m not stupid or stubborn, I m just here to ask some questions and be sure what I do is ok. BTW Spacecadet, copyright is a noun and also a verb https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/copyright Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giphotostock Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 So are you telling me not to trust Alamy? Not at all. Alamy is protected by the user agreement. What it tells you about licence type and releases isn't legally watertight permission to submit images containing IP you don't own. You don't own the copyright in the Star Wars or Batman images and you don't have permission from those who do. You therefore run a risk, at best of Alamy being asked to remove them, which it will, and at worst of legal action. Or as Martin says Alamy will take them down proactively to protect itself. I ask that because everybody here says me there is a risk while Alamy says me its safe as they have a special formula for people who sells images with IP without property releases Alamy is not saying it's 'safe'. The 'formula' is a policy on licence type for images sold without releases. It has no relevance to the matter of IP ownership. You are almost certainly infringing LFL's copyright and its trademarks and registered designs. When I say "Alamy say me it's safe" I mean I ask them directly. It doesn t prove there are right but they said that to me. Why do they ask in the attributes: "Does this image contain property that needs a release for commercial use ?" How about this scenario: LFL comes after Alamy AND you. You produce your only defense: "Alamy say me it's safe". Alamy hires lawyers, they produce the contract and point to certain clauses. Alamy goes after you for their legal expenses. LFL goes after you for their lost revenue and statutory damages. It would matter what country you live in, of course. Very real scenario. But as has been pointed, you have a wonderful ability to create, why not use it and produce your own IP? GI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edouardcoleman Posted December 8, 2015 Author Share Posted December 8, 2015 Thanks I created some images before that I uploaded in Alamy, but in 3 years the only thing I sold was the Batman logo and the Darth Vader face...That s why I deleted them and uploaded some new images with famous IP in I agree with you but there are so many people selling images with IP in Alamy that I thought it was legaly covered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edouardcoleman Posted December 8, 2015 Author Share Posted December 8, 2015 So are you telling me not to trust Alamy? Not at all. Alamy is protected by the user agreement. What it tells you about licence type and releases isn't legally watertight permission to submit images containing IP you don't own. You don't own the copyright in the Star Wars or Batman images and you don't have permission from those who do. You therefore run a risk, at best of Alamy being asked to remove them, which it will, and at worst of legal action. Or as Martin says Alamy will take them down proactively to protect itself. I ask that because everybody here says me there is a risk while Alamy says me its safe as they have a special formula for people who sells images with IP without property releases Alamy also has an indemnity clause (quoted above) in the contract that you've agreed to. You understand what indemnity is, don't you? Anyways, you seem to be pretty determined, as Robert pointed... I'd ask Member Services at the very least. Next, I'd get an E&O liability insurance and incorporate the business - your liability risks are going to be high. GI I ve already ask them several times and they said me this is safe with the "RM licence/no property releases" attributes. I really dont know what to do... How does that work for the RF logo of Star Wars that you have in your port. It's a lawsuit waiting to happen. You really don't understand that you are treading over somebody's IP and they are people who like to sue, have a long history of doing so. Example of others musing over this. http://law.stackexchange.com/questions/3988/how-might-this-use-of-the-star-wars-logo-and-universe-be-legal Of course I understand. My vectors with RF are now all awaiting for deletion. The question was about re-uploading those images as illustrations with RM licence and the attribute "no property releases" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprocket Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 There are copyrighted material inside my images but I created them. I didnt copy them. It is not necessary to make an exact facsimile to infringe copyright. You may find the examples in this article helpful: http://www.epuk.org/the-curve/visual-plagiarism The case of Tony Stone vs Stephen Arscott is probably the most relevant to your work: Tony Stone vs Stephen Arscott In 1994, Tony Stone Images took both Corel Corporation and Canadian artist Stephen Arscott to court over Arscott’s winning entry “The Real West” in that year’s Corel Draw World Design. While Arscott had stated on the competition entry form that his image was original, the central image was clearly based on a photograph taken by Tony Stone photographer Nick Vedros featuring a Native American wearing traditional headdress in side profile. The winning entry was also scheduled to appear in Corel’s worldwide marketing campaign. Arscott, a professional graphic designer at the Arscott, Ticar and Kobli Integrated Communications advertising firm, claimed the image had been created using CorelDraw’s freehand drawing tools. When initially contacted by Tony Stone, Arscott, who had received $25,000 cash and prizes in excess of $75,000, conceded that he had copied Vedros’ photograph, but that he had not infringed the copyright as he had transfered the medium from a photograph to a painting. In a letter he sent to Vedros, Arscott admitted “I used your photograph of the Potawatamie Indian as a reference for the creation of my piece” Arscott refused to return the prizes, and instead submitted to Corel a modified version of his original entry, in which the Native American was altered slightly, but which still infringed Vedros’ original work. He also claimed that Vedros had suffered no injury or damage from the infringement. The Canadian court found in favour of Tony Stone, who had sought $400,000 in damages from Arscott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 BTW Spacecadet, copyright is a noun and also a verb https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/copyright I meant to deprecate the casual use of the word 'copyrighted' (verb). As we all know there's no requirement under the Berne Convention for any formality to obtain copyright (noun). It comes into existence when the work is created. The US used to require registration which is why it didn't comply with the Convention until 1978. Perhaps this recent memory is why the verb is still sometimes used there. I don't have to 'copyright' (verb) my images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edouardcoleman Posted December 9, 2015 Author Share Posted December 9, 2015 I just got a reply from Alamy: "Hello Edouard, As you’ve uploaded your images as RM, you need not worry. You just have to accurately annotate these images.RM images are also fine for a commercial customer to use (dependant on their end use), and gives us an opportunity to flag the lack of release to the customer for them to decide if they’ll need one. If the end user is not adhering to the limitations of RM, then it is a case to worry. However, from our side, we ensure we sell proper licenses for every image use." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 And, of course, photographers are well known for discussing legal matters with other photographers, as well as following legal advise they get from other photographers. It's precisely because we're not lawyers that we're suggesting caution in using unlicensed IP. OP, there's no point in repetition. Sadly, and I hate to say it seeing all the work that has gone into your paintings, the safest outcome for you is probably if no-one licenses your images for a high-profile use. It's pretty unlikely anyway, because the publisher will be aware of the IP question even if you are not. Best start on some original material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edouardcoleman Posted December 9, 2015 Author Share Posted December 9, 2015 And, of course, photographers are well known for discussing legal matters with other photographers, as well as following legal advise they get from other photographers. It's precisely because we're not lawyers that we're suggesting caution in using unlicensed IP. OP, there's no point in repetition. Sadly, and I hate to say it seeing all the work that has gone into your paintings, the safest outcome for you is probably if no-one licenses your images for a high-profile use. It's pretty unlikely anyway, because the publisher will be aware of the IP question even if you are not. Best start on some original material. I'm asking a lawyer. I will post his answer as soon as I get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert M Estall Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 But what kind of a lawyer? I have seen some really awful advice from lawyers who seemed to be just chancing their arm outside their area of expertise. I note that your Alamy portfolio has been reduced to 18, I think it was all of 55? All the Batman stuff gone and a bunch of Star Wars emblems. And why did you delete the earlier material which might have been more original just because it wasn't selling? Not selling yet, that is. I've got hundreds, if not thousands of images which are still waiting patiently for a buyer. That's the way stock works! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 He's left the problematic stuff and switched it to RM. IP is quite a specialist area. I contribute to a law forum on copyright questions and the lawyers there usually agree with me. It's possible for a photographer to have a good appreciation of it. Just as well, really. The OP hasn't yet got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edouardcoleman Posted December 11, 2015 Author Share Posted December 11, 2015 He's left the problematic stuff and switched it to RM. IP is quite a specialist area. I contribute to a law forum on copyright questions and the lawyers there usually agree with me. It's possible for a photographer to have a good appreciation of it. Just as well, really. The OP hasn't yet got it. Nope you re wrong, I got what you said days ago and I took account of it. But I prefer to ask many different people and be totally sure instead of taking a decision too fast, thats all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edouardcoleman Posted December 11, 2015 Author Share Posted December 11, 2015 But what kind of a lawyer? I have seen some really awful advice from lawyers who seemed to be just chancing their arm outside their area of expertise. I note that your Alamy portfolio has been reduced to 18, I think it was all of 55? All the Batman stuff gone and a bunch of Star Wars emblems. And why did you delete the earlier material which might have been more original just because it wasn't selling? Not selling yet, that is. I've got hundreds, if not thousands of images which are still waiting patiently for a buyer. That's the way stock works! As Spacecadet said I reuploaded some of my vectors as illustration with RM. My earlier material was not as ok as what I do now thats also why I deleted it. Look at the two black/white/red Darth Vader, thats my old style and I prefer the new one. The lawyer I found is specialised in intellectual property and he said to me (to sum up) that what I do is quite risky. Now I m talking with Disney (which owns Lucasfilm) to reach an agreement. I know there is almost no chance I reach one but I try Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.