foc for photo used in flickr in NTUC income advertising campaign by BBH


davee78

New Member
Mar 23, 2008
261
0
0
#2
The owner of the photo agreed to not collect fees? It is possible
 

nelson-tan

Senior Member
Apr 10, 2010
837
0
16
#3
The text in the ad read: 'You can be sure of one thing with us - someone will pay for this.'

Obviously they meant that someone will pay for the damage to the car, not that someone will pay for the photo used.

I'm not sure how much I can trust someone who did not pay for the use of a photo to pay for damages to my car.
 

sfoto100

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2009
2,092
0
36
#4
i heard abt ntuc using the pic from someone... if ntuc did really infringed the copyright law then they are really low class...
 

flipfreak

Senior Member
Nov 26, 2007
7,030
0
36
Singapore
www.rogerchua.com
#5
if the picture is licensed under attribution, attribution share alike or Attribution No Derivatives, it allows ntuc or their ad agency to use the photo just by crediting the photographer.
 

Mar 26, 2005
882
0
0
#6
So when I choose None, all rights reserved under licensing in Flickr, any one who use my image for commercial use, even with credits to me, I can sue for damages ?
 

azul123

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2004
2,776
0
0
Eastern Bloc
#8
You believe everything you read? that is what they say... can always challenge.
 

limwhow

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2009
7,048
0
0
Life revolves arOnd East Coast
#10
In Flickr, there is such a options for photographers called Creative Common. They can opt for it and share their shots under which ever options they choose.
http://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/
Hmmm... that is why whenever we upload to Flickr, there is always the option to make it public or share among 'You Only, Friends and/or Family'.
I always make it You Only, Friends and/or Family.

Simply because as someone stated above, sharing it with the Public opens ourselves up to something like what happened.
I think the general mentality is that: it's for my own record and for sharing amongst friends. And photo-owners would probably expect any organisation who are keen to use their photos to give them credit, instead of just plucking it out of the internet and simply use it.
 

#12
I think it all depends on the licence chosen . If it attribution only then they can use it but if it is attribution non commercial my understanding is they wouldn't be able to

Can anybody clarify this ?
 

Sep 17, 2008
3,656
0
0
#18
i think it is "safer" bcos the search function is not good...
no. i cant remember which mod/admin said it before, but the TNC states that CS is not responsible for any of the comments/images that members upload, and its all members responsibility. also they clarified that images uploaded here, members have full rights to their pics too i think:think:

so do a quick search. there was a thread where i was also asking if can increase mem space for uploads and allow us to pay a small subscription fee:sweat:
 

blurry80

New Member
Jul 23, 2007
758
0
0
37
Toa Payoh
www.flickr.com
#19
I think to protect your images that you posted up on the net. You not only need to be able to verify infringement. You also need to have the financial capacity to persue legal action. If your images are not going to worth more than the cost to persue legal action then why even bother to protect it in the first place :D.
 

Top Bottom