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

[staz]

'The photo came from Flicker, an online photo management and sharing application. NTUC Income, which credited the source in the ad, did not have to pay for the photo." straits times


http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_542822.html

posting your pics in flickr might not be a good idea

 

[davee78]

The owner of the photo agreed to not collect fees? It is possible

 

[nelson-tan]

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]

i heard abt ntuc using the pic from someone... if ntuc did really infringed the copyright law then they are really low class...

 

[flipfreak]

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.

 

[stonefish35]

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 ?

 

[woojacky]

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 ?

Yeap you can actually.

 

[azul123]

You believe everything you read? that is what they say... can always challenge.

 

[stor]

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/

 

[limwhow]

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.

 

[azul123]

Share and use as publication same?

 

[Expat yorkshire]

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 ?

 

[gamebit]

yes as long as it is marked as "None (All rights reserved)"

the photo's rights belongs to you.

 

[ortega]

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/

yes this is right

 

[night86mare]

The owner of the photo agreed to not collect fees? It is possible

i think a lot of people have no idea what all the creative commons licenses do..

 

[allenleonhart]

i think a lot of people have no idea what all the creative commons licenses do..

and so i only upload here at clubsnap. the only place where i have no worries.:sweat:

 

[sfoto100]

and so i only upload here at clubsnap. the only place where i have no worries.:sweat:

i think it is "safer" bcos the search function is not good...

 

[allenleonhart]

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]

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 .