Leeching- industry ethics?


Status
Not open for further replies.
Aug 10, 2006
14
0
0
Brissy
#1
I read with a slight chagrin that the previous thread about "Leeching Alert-Luval" has been closed. Although it does seem a little disconcerting (yet encouraging) to know of the high ethical responses of Singaporean photographers, I felt that it was much needed to hear two sides of the story- openly. Indeed "Offspring" (Did I get it correct?) has received a personal apology, but this raises the necessity of other online photographers checking through other public forums to determine if their own photos have been stolen. One never knows if their photos have been displayed on questionable forums. I felt it was MUCH needed for Luval to make a public explanation of his action. It is good that the matter is closed or in legal lingo, settled out of court, but a stealing crime is liable for minimal public apology. As a well read and well respected forum worldwide, it would likely do CS good to enforce the guidelines as part of education.

It is hard to tell if the 'leecher' will do it again- albeit to anyone of your own photos. Wouldn't it be very unfair if one of our posted photos got stolen; no one knew about it for a long time; and the mistake becomes repeated again? As far as I am concerned, industry ethics blacklist the professional photographer in event of criminal intent or discovery. Should it be found out that the photographer has broken a serious rule of breaching/leeching, the photographer is blacklisted for an unknown duration of time.

Despite this thread/issue being closed (with due respect to the moderators), I believe that the media industry will appreciate appropriate action being taken. Luval is picking up skills and sharing skills from CS; and using them in the Singaporean media industry. It is critical for the media industry that his 'learning ground' at least takes appropriate action. Should he move into international waters one day; and made a similar mistake, it will probably be very uncomfortable for CS should it be discovered that Luval and the likes (if any still exist here) had their 'education' from here. It would also put us fair-minded, professional photographers in bad light, wouldn't it? : )
 

Deadpoet

Senior Member
Oct 18, 2004
4,619
0
0
#2
lighten up, get a life, move on.

Violation of copyrights is indeed serious, but do we really have to drag the corpse after burial, and whip it again?

If you are so gungho about this issue, why don't you take aim of the businesses that screw the working artists?
 

ortega

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 2, 2004
23,694
10
38
Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
#3
a leecher who is not a photographer and do not respect the photographer i would understand
but a leecher who is a photographer and do not respect his own kind ....?!?!?!
 

Aug 10, 2006
14
0
0
Brissy
#4
lighten up, get a life, move on.

Violation of copyrights is indeed serious, but do we really have to drag the corpse after burial, and whip it again?

If you are so gungho about this issue, why don't you take aim of the businesses that screw the working artists?
Thank you. If the corpse came back to life and took YOUR lifeblood away, would you 'lighten up, get a life and move on'? That would be nice to do; but if lifeblood was sucked dry by a corpse, that might not be as easy to do. Each corpse you bury, there are many other vampires around. Btw, The aforesaid artists aren't here, are they? : ) Anyway, thanks for your words!
 

Jemapela

New Member
Feb 20, 2005
791
0
0
Melbourne
www.jemapela.com
#5
I read with a slight chagrin that the previous thread about "Leeching Alert-Luval" has been closed. Although it does seem a little disconcerting (yet encouraging) to know of the high ethical responses of Singaporean photographers, I felt that it was much needed to hear two sides of the story- openly. Indeed "Offspring" (Did I get it correct?) has received a personal apology, but this raises the necessity of other online photographers checking through other public forums to determine if their own photos have been stolen. One never knows if their photos have been displayed on questionable forums. I felt it was MUCH needed for Luval to make a public explanation of his action. It is good that the matter is closed or in legal lingo, settled out of court, but a stealing crime is liable for minimal public apology. As a well read and well respected forum worldwide, it would likely do CS good to enforce the guidelines as part of education.

It is hard to tell if the 'leecher' will do it again- albeit to anyone of your own photos. Wouldn't it be very unfair if one of our posted photos got stolen; no one knew about it for a long time; and the mistake becomes repeated again? As far as I am concerned, industry ethics blacklist the professional photographer in event of criminal intent or discovery. Should it be found out that the photographer has broken a serious rule of breaching/leeching, the photographer is blacklisted for an unknown duration of time.

Despite this thread/issue being closed (with due respect to the moderators), I believe that the media industry will appreciate appropriate action being taken. Luval is picking up skills and sharing skills from CS; and using them in the Singaporean media industry. It is critical for the media industry that his 'learning ground' at least takes appropriate action. Should he move into international waters one day; and made a similar mistake, it will probably be very uncomfortable for CS should it be discovered that Luval and the likes (if any still exist here) had their 'education' from here. It would also put us fair-minded, professional photographers in bad light, wouldn't it? : )
I second you!

While I also agree with Deadpoet that life must move on, this matter of a real leeching appears to have been swept under the carpet too quickly. I'm sure many of us would be displeased with our images being leeched. There is greater severity if the images contain faces of, say customers or models, and leeched to adult/sex forums. Lets face it, customers or models can sue; only people can sue, and nobody wants to get sued.
 

#7
did that person receive a formal cetificate that proves that he received his "skills" from CS? if not, it's inappropriate to say said that CS was his education ground...
just my 2¢
 

melnjes

New Member
Aug 12, 2003
1,198
1
0
#9
Can I enquire what happened to the original thread? I saw it last evening, but not anymore.

Update: oh, silly me, it was moved to Kopitiam.
 

Deadpoet

Senior Member
Oct 18, 2004
4,619
0
0
#10
Thank you. If the corpse came back to life and took YOUR lifeblood away, would you 'lighten up, get a life and move on'? That would be nice to do; but if lifeblood was sucked dry by a corpse, that might not be as easy to do. Each corpse you bury, there are many other vampires around. Btw, The aforesaid artists aren't here, are they? : ) Anyway, thanks for your words!
I second you!

While I also agree with Deadpoet that life must move on, this matter of a real leeching appears to have been swept under the carpet too quickly. I'm sure many of us would be displeased with our images being leeched. There is greater severity if the images contain faces of, say customers or models, and leeched to adult/sex forums. Lets face it, customers or models can sue; only people can sue, and nobody wants to get sued.
Gentlemen, I personally, if someone leeched my work, will go after them as far as the law/society will allow.

That said, the copyright holder had indicated that he had accppted the apology, and want the incident closed. We as a society (CS) should respect that. Unless, we as a society has a set of laws/expectation how to deal with members violating copyrights.

Unfortunately, we don't have such set of rules and expectations, hence, we are arguing back and forth what to do with the violaters. This can easily explode into a mob mentality, anything short of lynching will not quench the angst.

Maybe, the dicussion should be, how should CS, as a society, deal with members who had knowingly violated copyrights of others.

Barring that, let's respect the copyright holder's wish and move on.
 

#12
say no to leeching, leechers and lechers!!!:thumbsup:

its amazing that a fellow 'photographer' would leech.
no pride in their own works, meh?



where there is controversy, there u'll find... Curry Cheese Cream Puffs.
Say Say Say!
 

Jul 17, 2006
44
0
0
World Wanderer
#13
Photographers are part of the creative industry. Every creative work requires an effort to be done. Every successful angle and composure is the result of many failures. Therefore, one would normally take pride in their own work. As much as they take pride in their own work, they would also protect it as well.

If your work was stolen and claim by others to be theirs, and that work constitute part of their portfolio, who is benefiting at whose expense? Is it just a mere intention of adoration that drives most people to steal other people's work or is it because it is the faster way to build up a substantial portfolio.

The industry as a whole, suffers from the negative backlash of such actions because the quality of the photographer engaged differs from the portfolio presented and as a result even portfolio has little credibility.

A previous thread mention about photographers being exploited for low wages. Yet the low wages for fresh photographers is a direct result of such actions because portfolio is losing its credibility. So each time you condone someone who steals a picture from someone else, you lose some of the higher wage that you could have gotten had you prevented it.

Poet, you are right to a certain extend that CS does not have a specific set of rules against such actions. Yet we are not and should not just point fingers at Luval since that matter has been resolved, but rather using Luval as an example, case-in-point of members in this community, regular members who could be someone who have a shoot with you and lim kopi exchange pointers one day, and steal your photos the next. It comes much closer to home.

That being the case, in the longer run those who are more experienced are less likely to share their photos for fear of such theft. It is not immediate, but it is an eventuality and would members of CS benefit from then, should that eventuality arrive?

Though there are no certificate being issued by CS, one cannot deny that there are many newbies who just started and are picking up from what their seniors are doing.

my views

cheers
 

Deadpoet

Senior Member
Oct 18, 2004
4,619
0
0
#15
Monk,

Totally agree.

I am just concern with mob mentality. Maybe, we should have a CS code of conduct reguarding copyrights? And more importantly, what to do if one of our own violated copyrights?

However, that said, there should not be any cruel and unusual punishment. The punishment must fit the crime, and there are many form of copyrights violation.
 

firepingo

New Member
Aug 30, 2006
18
0
0
#16
Been reading these posting with great interests.

Mob Mentality arises because people do not know what to expect when someone is expose or caught. It happens in all society, and even in our country.

Of course there are several degrees as to the punishment which is dependent if the picture is commercial or non commercial. Commercial ones then the companies will decide on what damages to claim. Non-commercial ones the photographer can charge a one time license fee for the usage of the photo. CS can be the 3rd party valuer of how much license fee to charge. On top of that, those leeching regarding Models, they can demand the normal charges they would usually charged if engage by the photographer.

Yet, with all forms of infringement of copyright, most offenders would be expected to make their apology public and promise never to infringe again. That is the least the thief can do.

This would be applicable only to members within CS, and not applicable to those from other forum.

Not sure would it work or not....

we'll see

Cheers
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom