Straits Times breaks Copyright Act (chp 63)

[LazerLordz]

If you want to fight, you have to go the copyright way. And I must say that you will get nothing in return.

The principle of the law is to protect. Do you have something to be protected? What is it? What's the cost if you lose that something?

You must have answers to those questions.

Maybe they will apologize, but they will still do it in the future. Why? Because the public are forgetful people.

Which is why the public has to be educated about this, lest they forget, like how media forces are shaping the landscape for memory to be a consumable, to be used and discarded because long-term memory isn't exactly explicitly encouraged.

Privacy argument is shot to pieces, but if you can prove that some of the pictures are of value to you as the photographer, then that's a different story.

 

[ortega]

I will post it up on a petition site and I hope that anyone who feels that Straits Times has not lived up to the standards fitting of a leading print media outlet will sign this petition.

you have my fullest support on this
just point me to the petition and i will sign it right away

 

[cynic]

I asked whether any authorization was requested before using the photos
That was the response. Frankly I am quite appalled by the attitude...

it's just so typical of them to not answer questions directly. sheesh!

do update us on the outcome of the lawyer's letter and all.

 

[trlnlty]

wait what did the friendster terms and condition says?

once you upload the photo to their domain, you basically give them the photo?

i briefly read through it.

anyway, I dont know why you are making such a big fuss over it. If they got the photo from friendster and credited them, they did their job in covering their behinds.

She already apologized for causing any distress and inconvience ..wasnt that what you were looking for in the first place?


btw, ironically, i think that private emails between 2 people should remain confidential?? i'd remove it if i were you :dunno:

 

[Wolfgang]

Dear All,

Please note that OT is discoraged in this particular thread. If you wish to discuss/argue/debate IPR issues that has nothing to do with this thread (Pics leeched and posted on sggirls, or IP infringement by other csers etc etc...) , then may i suggest you start another thread?

This thread should remain strictly for the discussion on the issue raised by Mattlock.

Thank you very much for your understanding.

WG.

 

[quekky]

In addition, our lawyers had advised us that as there are no privacy laws in Singapore, the use of blog pictures does not infringe a person's privacy.
- Sandra Leong, Journalist

does that mean that i can copy pics on SPH website or other people's blog and post on my own blog? :dunno:

 

[mattlock]

anyway, I dont know why you are making such a big fuss over it. If they got the photo from friendster and credited them, they did their job in covering their behinds.

She already apologized for causing any distress and inconvience ..wasnt that what you were looking for in the first place?

To answer your question, read the reply below

Which is why the public has to be educated about this, lest they forget, like how media forces are shaping the landscape for memory to be a consumable, to be used and discarded because long-term memory isn't exactly explicitly encouraged.

This is exactly exactly why I am taking the time to do this
If I go up to your face and slap you, then say sorry
I guess that's alright?

These are interesting times where the regular media forces are of course all-powerful, and they are trying to impose their point of view on new forms of media (blogs) into the minds of people who read newspapers.

What do you think these words which were used in the article imply?
"iwant2bfamous.com", "Read me. I want to be famous." "narcissistic." "me-me-me". "Isn't there something unhealthy about how people are so eager to share with the world every wart in their lives?"
"... where self-expression borders on self-indulgence?"
(excerpts from Lifestyle! 30th July 2006)

This is not the first time Life! has portrayed blogs in an unseeming light, and this time they are phrasing the article in such a way that it seems balanced while asking questions that implicitly suggest that the motivations behind blogs are not positive.
I remember Sumiko Tan even writing in her column once that blogs were about as bad as porn! (I'm sure someone read that too)
So straits times has an agenda against blogs. Fine. but I don't want my photos taken without authorization, when I am easily contactable

Does this mean that I can take pictures off their site in the name of reporting and Fair Dealing?

 

[mattlock]

mattlock, if the blogs the pictures were leeched from had disclaimers or terms and conditions attached, it would certainly enforce your case.

afraid not....I've only found one other person whose picture was used in that montage
looking for more of them to ask them

 

[fotoudavid]

Hi matt,

i support u, need signature, just tell me.

 

[blazer_workz]

Something for us to ponder:
Talking about copyright, isn't copying the norm in our society?

Opera House, London Eye, many many more if you look around the environment we are in..
Even some of the CSer like to copy composition if they feel its good..

Copy a concept and adding a minor touch to improve..isn't it still copy?
What happen to our creativity?

But back to the topic. How come there isn't privacy law involve? :think:
I know nuts about law.:dunno:

 

[ortega]

spore does not have privacy laws

 

[blazer_workz]

spore does not have privacy laws

So does it means we can setup a tripod wif camera right infront of some actor/actress/MPs house and start shooting at them when they come out..not too sure abt this? advice pls?

 

[mattlock]

blazer, let's not OT, let's keep this thread relevant so people don't have to trawl through it to figure out what's going on

 

[blazer_workz]

blazer, let's not OT, let's keep this thread relevant so people don't have to trawl through it to figure out what's going on

Okie..sorry for the OT..have to research the law by myself le..
let us noe the link for petition when its ready..will support it.

 

[Deadpoet]

Have we looked at the copyrights clauses with the websites. Or have the two websites been notified that ST leeched the pictures from their site. That may be another alternative angle to persue this matter.

 

[hongsien]

People like you like to imagine...imagine too much or making others in your fancy...

Dont put words into my mouth, I just said that even in CS, CSer copied, download and share others photos as well.

I didn't say you can't discuss the issue here, but apparently, many (including many CSers) are not that aware with IP...and took others IP for granted. I still remember one CSer used my photo in his buy/sell thread...but cropping away my logo...of course, I can't afford to hire a lawyer for that...

Are all photos in CS Gallery all original? What should CS do if found out members from stealing others photos? Perhaps a rule of banning members from the forum if he/she is found guilty...

I understand your point Kho King, but Clubsnap is not a company whereby we are all paid by Clubsnap, but just providing an avenue to post messages. All of us here are individuals and have no relationship to Clubsnap (except the moderators then).........we post on our own personal stand.

So, basically we have nothing to do with the person leeching your picture......you should instead take it up with the person one on one......

But it is good you are pointing us to another case within Clubsnap which is off course not tolerable.

HS

 

[mattlock]

I'm crafting the letter now and would like suggestions on what sort of apology to request from the Straits Times.

Should I ask for a specific sized column on a specific page or section, and what size would be good?

 

[shinken]

I'm crafting the letter now and would like suggestions on what sort of apology to request from the Straits Times.

Should I ask for a specific sized column on a specific page or section, and what size would be good?

No idea about size. But I suggest to include apology in 1 page html in Straits Times Interactive, accessible by non-subscribers, over and on top of the print circulation.

 

[auron]

get real! an apology from the ST on print somemore? good luck to anyone trying to get that. never seen any apology printed by ST. except when it is from the gahmen.

 

[mattlock]

get real! an apology from the ST on print somemore? good luck to anyone trying to get that. never seen any apology printed by ST. except when it is from the gahmen.

thanks, but that doesn't answer my question.