That site has all the markings of a scam. Horrible writing. Tacky layout. Straight up jacked photos with NO RESIZING. b,121b,121"Help make Movie History" aka The film may or may not happen.b,121b,121This shit is pitiful.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121Just as an aside, if you haven't already you need to put text on your site, that images are copyright of you unless otherwise stated. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121Such a statement has no effect on the actual existence of copyright, but I guess it would have use as a reminder to anyone wishing to use copyright material. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121Yeah, but you have to make a good faith effort to protect your copyright. It also makes it harder for the asshat saying, "I didn't know the pictures were copyrighted."
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121b,121i for one welcome the hilarity that will ensue when the guy visits this thread. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121b,121yeah, but then again in the Black Devil Doll thread the director showed up and it was a total letdown. Nobody engaged him except me so he got bored and left. Lame. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121yeah cause his "movie" looked like a tepid terd ripoff of a WAY cooler flick. I'm so sick of remakes. I wanna punch the next person that does one in the throat.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121Watermark your record scans! b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121b,121X10000000000000000000 b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121ah, that would look kinda shitty... I don't mind people using these. Just not like this fool and not for commercial purposes b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121b,121It can be really unobtrusive, but enough to make people think twice about just taking them.b,121b,121
Why do people make such a big deal about this kinda stuff? It's just some JPG's. I mean, I only really get irked when dudes are too lazy to actually host my stolen images themselves and are just linking to them.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121b,121i for one welcome the hilarity that will ensue when the guy visits this thread. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121b,121yeah, but then again in the Black Devil Doll thread the director showed up and it was a total letdown. Nobody engaged him except me so he got bored and left. Lame. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121yeah cause his "movie" looked like a tepid terd ripoff of a WAY cooler flick. I'm so sick of remakes. I wanna punch the next person that does one in the throat. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121b,121You are the most guilty! You should have called him out!
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121b,121i for one welcome the hilarity that will ensue when the guy visits this thread. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121b,121yeah, but then again in the Black Devil Doll thread the director showed up and it was a total letdown. Nobody engaged him except me so he got bored and left. Lame. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121yeah cause his "movie" looked like a tepid terd ripoff of a WAY cooler flick. I'm so sick of remakes. I wanna punch the next person that does one in the throat. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121b,121You are the most guilty! You should have called him out! b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121YOU ESE! YOU ESE! YOU ESE!/b1
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121b,121i for one welcome the hilarity that will ensue when the guy visits this thread. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121b,121yeah, but then again in the Black Devil Doll thread the director showed up and it was a total letdown. Nobody engaged him except me so he got bored and left. Lame. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121yeah cause his "movie" looked like a tepid terd ripoff of a WAY cooler flick. I'm so sick of remakes. I wanna punch the next person that does one in the throat. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121b,121You are the most guilty! You should have called him out! b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121pretty sure I said I didn't care for it in that thread.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121Why do people make such a big deal about this kinda stuff? It's just some JPG's. I mean, I only really get irked when dudes are too lazy to actually host my stolen images themselves and are just linking to them. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121thats the best when people just link to them, then you can change the pic of that specific URL to some really embarrasing stuff...
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121Why do people make such a big deal about this kinda stuff? It's just some JPG's. I mean, I only really get irked when dudes are too lazy to actually host my stolen images themselves and are just linking to them. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121thats the best when people just link to them, then you can change the pic of that specific URL to some really embarrasing stuff... b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121b,121haha I did that to DigDug once and people thought he was a 16 y.o. kid with a moustache.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121It can be really unobtrusive, but enough to make people think twice about just taking them.b,121b,121 b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121I appreciate the thought. I still think it looks much nicer without any watermark. Plus, if you really intend to use this stuff, you can just go and photoshop it out. I don't have any problem with anybody using these pictures as long as they mention where they got them from. To have them show up on such a shitty site, without any context and in such a pathetic effort to make a few buck is just insulting. I've seen bums beg for money with more style and dignity.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121 To have them show up on such a shitty site, without any context and in such a pathetic effort to make a few buck is just insulting. b,121b,121h,121
Just wait until someone walks off with some of your spins for real,and not a picture of it...b,121b,121 b,121b,121ps. gotta say your Blog goes down as one of the best I've ever come across, and anything that hack could do will never touch it, so rest easy.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121Why do people make such a big deal about this kinda stuff? It's just some JPG's. I mean, I only really get irked when dudes are too lazy to actually host my stolen images themselves and are just linking to them. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121thats the best when people just link to them, then you can change the pic of that specific URL to some really embarrasing stuff... b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121b,121haha I did that to DigDug once and people thought he was a 16 y.o. kid with a moustache. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121WTF?b,121b,121If you were somehow able to do this to one of the few avatars I've ever had you probably got away w/it for a long time! I always have them turned off. But I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121b,121ps. gotta say your Blog goes down as one of the best I've ever come across, and anything that hack could do will never touch it, so rest easy. b,121b,121h,121
Quote:/font1h,121b,121 To have them show up on such a shitty site, without any context and in such a pathetic effort to make a few buck is just insulting. b,121b,121h,121
It's funny, I spent my day at a workshop entitled Legal Aspects of Photography Rights, Archive Management, and Permissions. This would've made for interesting discussion. I'm an archivist, not a copyright lawyer (though I did very much enjoy learning from one all day) so the nuances of this stuff are beyond my grasp.b,121b,121It's a tricky one. Frank did take the photographs which, in a sense, should grant him copyright protection. Though, the photographs were explicitly of previously copyrighted material. But his arrangement of those particular four records in each photo is unique to his photos. b,121b,121Hmmmm... I can't chew on this at 3 am.
as i understand there are different levels of rights. Of course, the album cover art is one level of protected work. The photograph is another level of copyright which belongs to the photographer.b,121b,121an analogy would be an art museum making a catalog or something for advertising purposes. They want one of the most prominent works on the cover. Of course, there are intellectual property rights associated with that work of art. Then the museum pays a professional photographer to make a suitable representation of that artwork for their catalog, and there is another level of copyright associated with the work of the photographer.b,121b,121To me this is also analogous with music copyright. A composer owns the rights to the composition itself, but various performers have rights to their own recordings of the composition (they of course should have arrangements with the composer, in other words, permission to record and reproduce the composition in the first place).b,121b,121i am not a lawyer, but this is my understanding of the matter.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121as i understand there are different levels of rights. Of course, the album cover art is one level of protected work. The photograph is another level of copyright which belongs to the photographer.b,121b,121an analogy would be an art museum making a catalog or something for advertising purposes. They want one of the most prominent works on the cover. Of course, there are intellectual property rights associated with that work of art. Then the museum pays a professional photographer to make a suitable representation of that artwork for their catalog, and there is another level of copyright associated with the work of the photographer.b,121b,121To me this is also analogous with music copyright. A composer owns the rights to the composition itself, but various performers have rights to their own recordings of the composition (they of course should have arrangements with the composer, in other words, permission to record and reproduce the composition in the first place).b,121b,121i am not a lawyer, but this is my understanding of the matter. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121Frank's situation is difficult because his work is infringing on the copyrights of the record companies (he wasn't hired to take the photos, like in your museum example). And, though it appears to be fair use as one could argue that his sharing of the covers is for educational purposes, most courts view any web publishing as commercial use (according to this guy, who led the workshop I went to yesterday).b,121b,121Though, as I said, Frank's arrangement of the particular records in each image is unique. Unique enough to claim that his photos are tranformative works derived from the originals? I don't know. All of this stuff is pretty murky business.b,121b,121Of course, it doesn't seem like Frank cares to this degree. It's just fun to noodle over. Copyright law aside, it's pretty lame to post someone else's work without giving them credit (or at least linking to the blog you stole the images from). Personally, I've copied Frank's images and shown them to a few people who are interested in African funk records (the poster images are especially amazing), but I've also told them about Frank and given them a link to his blog.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121Copyright law aside, it's pretty lame to post someone else's work without giving them credit (or at least linking to the blog you stole the images from). Personally, I've copied Frank's images and shown them to a few people who are interested in African funk records (the poster images are especially amazing), but I've also told them about Frank and given them a link to his blog. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121Not that my opinion matters, but as someone with a blog full of cover scans and audio I agree that this is the honorable thing to do. But ultimately, I think if you're going to put something on the web you have to come to terms with the fact that you've basically got no control once it's out there.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121Copyright law aside, it's pretty lame to post someone else's work without giving them credit (or at least linking to the blog you stole the images from). Personally, I've copied Frank's images and shown them to a few people who are interested in African funk records (the poster images are especially amazing), but I've also told them about Frank and given them a link to his blog. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121Not that my opinion matters, but as someone with a blog full of cover scans and audio I agree that this is the honorable thing to do. But ultimately, I think if you're going to put something on the web you have to come to terms with the fact that you've basically got no control once it's out there. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121That's certainly true. We post uncredited images on here all the time. But these guys built a new page on their site dedicated to Frank's images without mentioning Frank. It'd be one thing if it were a collection of images of Barack Obama or whatever. But images that were (photos of) the fruit of such rare and unique collecting efforts deserve the story behind them. I'm not at all surprised to see Frank's images resurfacing, but I am surprised to see a site that features the images on their own page without offering any background.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121 I'm not at all surprised to see Frank's images resurfacing, but I am surprised to see a site that features the images on their own page without offering any background. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121Not to mention that by doing so, this guy is trying to pass himself off as some kind of expert on a subject that he seemingly has rudimentary knowledge of. Its basically using years of somebody else's hard work - putting it mildly - to pad your own resume and make a couple bucks. b,121b,121Yes something like this was bound to happen, and I think Frank had the right to be annoyed when it finally did.
What got me annoyed was a mix of various things:b,121b,121b,1211. the sheer quantity of the pictures he hi-jackedb,121b,1212. the sloppy way he presents them without even having re-sized them or arranged them in a halfway appealing manner.b,121b,1213. the fact that he exclusively shows off record covers that he took from my blog, if he would have taken maybe 12 or 20 cover scans from 5 different sources, I would have never said anything if 4 pictures amongst them would have been from my blog. Everybody who thinks I'm overreacting here just have a look at the site (http://www.afrika70.com) I mean if that's not tastless and impertinent I don't know what is.b,121b,1214. the fact that he's asking for money and trying to lure folks into making donations to him by passing other people's work off as his own. As mentioned before, even the "teaser" to his "movie" is merely a collage of footage from other documentaries.b,121b,1215. People who know my blog and stumble over this site might think I've given this guy permission to use my pictures or even worse, that I'd have anything to do with this scam. I'd much rather have testicular cancer than being associated with someone who calls himself "Raymond J. Dumas the Third".
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121Copyright law aside, it's pretty lame to post someone else's work without giving them credit (or at least linking to the blog you stole the images from). Personally, I've copied Frank's images and shown them to a few people who are interested in African funk records (the poster images are especially amazing), but I've also told them about Frank and given them a link to his blog. b,121b,121h,121
b,121b,121Not that my opinion matters, but as someone with a blog full of cover scans and audio I agree that this is the honorable thing to do. But ultimately, I think if you're going to put something on the web you have to come to terms with the fact that you've basically got no control once it's out there. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121That's certainly true. We post uncredited images on here all the time. But these guys built a new page on their site dedicated to Frank's images without mentioning Frank. It'd be one thing if it were a collection of images of Barack Obama or whatever. But images that were (photos of) the fruit of such rare and unique collecting efforts deserve the story behind them. I'm not at all surprised to see Frank's images resurfacing, but I am surprised to see a site that features the images on their own page without offering any background. b,121b,121h,121b,121b,121I agree that it's crumby, my point is that the only way to be safe from this type of thing is to just leave it off-line. After 3 years of doing Waxidermy I've had hoards of reviews stolen in part or whole without credit, ridiculous in-joke records hyped by clueless eBay dudes, etc, etc. There are plenty of blog dudes who just build blogs out canabalized blogs. I've just learned to put this shit into perspective and move on. I mean, at the end of the day all the dude who stole Frank's pictures has is a shitty website full of little more than boosted JPG's.
Comments