Photo "stolen" by newspaper reporter
- Thread starter duhville
- Start date
- Status
Duhville,
When you feel like your work has been stolen, you are right. What's more, copyright misappropriation is not only wrong, it is ILLEGAL !!! :nono: So you are right pressing on.
Now, it might be you will be just ignored by them. Why? Your letter was too informal and too nice. So they will hope that if they pretend you don't exist, at the end you will just buzz off . Please, prove them wrong.
If you have a friend who is a lawyer, maybe he could write another letter to the editor, this time a true nasty-gram in convoluted legalese? :devil: That, for sure will not be ignored by the editor like the letter you wrote. :angry:
When you feel like your work has been stolen, you are right. What's more, copyright misappropriation is not only wrong, it is ILLEGAL !!! :nono: So you are right pressing on.
Now, it might be you will be just ignored by them. Why? Your letter was too informal and too nice. So they will hope that if they pretend you don't exist, at the end you will just buzz off . Please, prove them wrong.
If you have a friend who is a lawyer, maybe he could write another letter to the editor, this time a true nasty-gram in convoluted legalese? :devil: That, for sure will not be ignored by the editor like the letter you wrote. :angry:
If you have not received a response from them after 2 weeks or so. Write another letter to this editor with the 1st letter attached. But this time, "cc" the letter to MITA or your lawyer friend. Clearly indicate your intention to take further action if the matter is not resolved soonest.
And as mentioned numerous times in this thread before, this is not just about a single picture. It is about the principle and the values we excercise (and not just cheap talk) in today's society. It is clearly a struggle between doing what's right and letting the wrong do its will. There is no neutrality or middle ground to this.
And perhaps this notion is so eloquently expressed by Edmund Burke who wrote: "The Only Thing Necessary For Evil To Flourish Is For Good Men To Do Nothing."
And as mentioned numerous times in this thread before, this is not just about a single picture. It is about the principle and the values we excercise (and not just cheap talk) in today's society. It is clearly a struggle between doing what's right and letting the wrong do its will. There is no neutrality or middle ground to this.
And perhaps this notion is so eloquently expressed by Edmund Burke who wrote: "The Only Thing Necessary For Evil To Flourish Is For Good Men To Do Nothing."
I can relate to the post...
My photos at pbase was copied and published in the frontpage of a section of The Star. I was their stringer at time. I sent out an email to friends, including a few reporters at The Star, inviting them to visit the latest gallery.
A week later the pictures appeared in paper. Nobody has called me or asked for my permission to publish those pictures. I had not submitted the pictures to the editor. Someone in the office has copied my pictures at pbase and submitted them together with the article--with no acknowledgement to my authorship.
I know they were copied because it was the only place those pix were available. I was shocked and angry.
I called up the reporters at The Star and confronted them. They admitted to copying my pictures without my permission. They apologized.
Two days later, I called up the regional editor, told him what had happened and demanded for a compensation. The ed reacted angrily to me. "You are asking for a compensation??? I don't want to hear from you again. I will check with my reporters and decide what to do next."
I forwarded my demands in writing three months ago. There is no news from The Star since then. I face the dilemma of whether to keep on fighting this or just forget about it. But it is upseting when such big publications pay no courtesy or hold no integrity. I won't say everyone in the org is as such but it shows a lot of apathy towards copyrights and distain towards a photographer.
After all, it is only a photograph. How hard can it be to take one.
My photos at pbase was copied and published in the frontpage of a section of The Star. I was their stringer at time. I sent out an email to friends, including a few reporters at The Star, inviting them to visit the latest gallery.
A week later the pictures appeared in paper. Nobody has called me or asked for my permission to publish those pictures. I had not submitted the pictures to the editor. Someone in the office has copied my pictures at pbase and submitted them together with the article--with no acknowledgement to my authorship.
I know they were copied because it was the only place those pix were available. I was shocked and angry.
I called up the reporters at The Star and confronted them. They admitted to copying my pictures without my permission. They apologized.
Two days later, I called up the regional editor, told him what had happened and demanded for a compensation. The ed reacted angrily to me. "You are asking for a compensation??? I don't want to hear from you again. I will check with my reporters and decide what to do next."
I forwarded my demands in writing three months ago. There is no news from The Star since then. I face the dilemma of whether to keep on fighting this or just forget about it. But it is upseting when such big publications pay no courtesy or hold no integrity. I won't say everyone in the org is as such but it shows a lot of apathy towards copyrights and distain towards a photographer.
After all, it is only a photograph. How hard can it be to take one.
louispang said:
A friend of mine who is a freelance photographer told me that when a newspaper wishes to use a certain photo taken by a freelancer/amatuer, the rate for each of the image is about S$80 or so. Can someone confirm on this?
snowspeeder said:
The rate varies, depends on which publication you deal with. Wire agencies probably pay the best rates. A friend told me that EPA pays S$200 per pix.
In Malaysia, AP pays RM150 while AFP pays RM100 per pix.
The establishment/authorities/whatever you want to call them try to clamp down on pirated goods. It's relatively easy for the powers-that-be to impose their will on pirates. It's not so easy for an individual citizen to assert his copyright. THAT, to me is absurd.Minoxman said:
Yah, no doubt many people on the forum have used pirated software or purchased pirated VCDs/DVDs. Still, Microsoft et. al. and TimeWarner/Sony/Disney et. al. make BILLIONS despite "rampant" pirating.
This issue is not merely about copyright infringement. It's is about the power certain groups to exercise their rights over others. In this case, an individual.
Microsoft, under the umbrella of the Business Software Alliance, has every right to (and does) go after pirated software manufacturers together with local authorities. The RIAA, on behalf on the powerful media conglomerates, has every right to (and does) go after mp3 users. The Singapore Police Force has made it all but impossible to purchase pirated VCDs/DVDs here. Duhville, even though he does not belong to some mega-rich corporation, has EVERY RIGHT to pursue this matter. In fact, I would say that it's even more important for him to do so.
Following your logic, if a robber's house gets robbed, the robber does not have recourse to justice. And other robbers who witnessed this robbery should shut up. But I guess that's okay to some.
The bottom line is that the Berita Harian reporter and/or his editor have no journalistic integrity. Whether CSers have ever infringed copyright in their lives is not relevant to the fact that duhville's copyright has been infringed.
snowspeeder said:
If it's true, then I've just wasted $80.
While on the way to zoo this morning, a car infront of me skidded from right to left and hit the railing, bounced up about 1m high and eventually landed on the middle lane.
How close was I, the debris hit the left of my car!!!
Helped call the police. Later was told by police that the drive was ok.
But car surely got to 'kill'.
So friends, slowly and steady is the way to go!
The simple response to your statment is: no, it is not okay. The complex response will be totally OT. Go read Lawrence Lessig's work.Minoxman said:
Suffice to say, copyright owners - particularly those with fat wallets and political influence - will use the full extent of the law to hunt down and prosecute copyright infringers. My point is not that it is okay for people to infringe copyright. What I did say is that it is irrelevant to duhville's plight whether the people on CS are copyright infringers or not. If any CSers have infringed copyright, then the owners have every right to go after them and that's another story altogether.
Copyright law protects all content-owners equally. However, the enforcement of the law clearly leans towards megacoporations' favour, be it in claiming damages from copyright infringement OR defending themselves against copyright claims. This is where the ironic smoke you smell is coming from.
My point is that duhville has should pursue this matter and be given the means to do so even if he doesn't have a fat wallet or political influence. So, yes, duhville should engage a lawyer if SPH/BH does not respond or want to settle this matter amicably out of court.
Perhaps you would like to help pay, since you're above us poor hypocritical copyright infringers who have no say in pointing out an injustice.
Following your logic, nobody can be a policeman or a judge because they are so obviously not perfect and have probably jaywalked - and dare I say, infringed others' copyrights - among other things.
Finally, I'll restate that it is doubly wrong for the BH reporter to have stolen the photo. 1. He broke the law; and 2. As a journalist, he has an ethical obligation to provide fair and honest reporting, which he has not by claiming the photo credit.
Obviously Duhville has the right to pursue the matter. You mean this point is even in contention? Of course the BH reporter was wrong. Again, a no brainer. Now whether duhville goes on to sue is his decision.
It's just amazing watching kettles shouting at pots, that's all.
It's just amazing watching kettles shouting at pots, that's all.
roygoh said:
actually its a simple thing that we should tell him... minorman... its 2 separate issue... dun mix them together... even u wanna sue BH for the publication of the pics, they won't be checking your pc for the pirated software rite, den even if they wan, its not BH problem to sue either, its the software publisher's problem... y bother?
JackRussell said:
If you wrote it for the company, it is a "work for hire" and the company owns the copyright. The company needs to pursue the matter. Tell them to get a lawyer who knows intellectual property and get his opinion.
Life itself is full of ironies. There's never ending to it. But we should not let these 'ironies' prevent or discourage a person from exercising his/her right to seek legal redress. That's what the legal system is for. No one can be perfectly 'clean' if he is scrutinized and measured against the law day and night. But that does not mean he has no entitlement to use the legal system to protect his rights. Let's not implicate other issues into this case.
V
vince123123
Guest
The person who asserts the position has the burden of proof of showing that the position exists.
cheers
cheers
Minoxman said:
- Status
Similar threads
