copyright: Hi. A member of our camera club has recently been suspected of entering photos of other people's images into our club competitions. Some have argued that because his image...

dilong Loc: Herne Bay, UK

Hi. A member of our camera club has recently been suspected of entering photos of other people's images into our club competitions. Some have argued that because his image has been taken by him irrespective of subject, that is ok, but others are saying it is copyright infringement. Any ideas anyone? Thanks.

moonhawk Loc: Land of Enchantment

You may want to clear up some of your references. To which party do "his" and "him" apply?

Sandie

Did he enter photos others took or did he take a photo of something others have taken before him and then he entered it into competition? IF he took someone else's photo off the internet etc and then entered it as his own the SHAME ON HIM.

Mr PC Loc: Austin, TX

You should be able do an image search on Google or Bing to determine if the photo was publicly displayed elsewhere under someone else's name. If so, you have more ammo. It sounds like you must already have some strong suspicions.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

dilong wrote:

Hi. A member of our camera club has recently been suspected of entering photos of other people's images into our club competitions. Some have argued that because his image has been taken by him irrespective of subject, that is ok, but others are saying it is copyright infringement. Any ideas anyone? Thanks.

I am confused. Did he enter some ones work as his own? (shameful). Did he photograph some ones picture and enter it as original (equally shameful) Did he photograph the same subject or scene as some one else. If so it is an original photo and therefore acceptable. After all if 2 photographers side by side shoot the same rose both photos will be original.

redhogbill Loc: antelope, calif

boberic wrote:

I am confused. Did he enter some ones work as his own? (shameful). Did he photograph some ones picture and enter it as original (equally shameful) Did he photograph the same subject or scene as some one else. If so it is an original photo and therefore acceptable.

:thumbup:

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

boberic wrote:

I am confused. Did he enter some ones work as his own? (shameful). Did he photograph some ones picture and enter it as original (equally shameful) Did he photograph the same subject or scene as some one else. If so it is an original photo and therefore acceptable. After all if 2 photographers side by side shoot the same rose both photos will be original.

Think of it this way- How many pictures of the moon are there. Each one is original

nicksr1125 Loc: Mesa, AZ

Whether the image is copyrighted or not, he's stealing someone else's work & calling it his. That should be enough to get him kicked out of the club if it can be proven.

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

I assume you mean he is taking photos of the photos of other people.

That is a copyright infringement by definition. He is COPYING a photo for which he does not have the RIGHT.

dilong Loc: Herne Bay, UK

Sorry, to clarify we think what the club member has done is taken a photograph of a photograph and/or picture. So presumably one way of doing this would be to download an image, print it, and then photograph the print. He is doing rather well in competitions at the moment.

redhogbill Loc: antelope, calif

dilong wrote:

Sorry, to clarify we think what the club member has done is taken a photograph of a photograph and/or picture. So presumably one way of doing this would be to download an image, print it, and then photograph the print. He is doing rather well in competitions at the moment.

"ONE THOUGHT" if your member is "finding" a photo online
"downloading" it, then "printing" it, THEN taking a photo of "said" picture on a piece of paper,
and make's "his" {so to speak} photograph look like he was there and make it look original {ie, sharpness, clarity, color, etc.} in my opinion is one h$ll of a photographer!!!
he would have the ability to go into the world and do some fine photography!!
"SECOND THOUGHT" { here is the technical part} if he stated that "is" what he did, then he could not get graded on content!! and would not win {but sounds like that is not the case}
"THIRD THOUGHT" and if the "first thought " is the case,
and he not state he took a photo of a picture, he is a common thief!!
I am also curious! what do the rules state in this contest?

{disclaimer} nobody was hurt in the making of this post!!

Capture48 Loc: Arizona

dilong wrote:

Hi. A member of our camera club has recently been suspected of entering photos of other people's images into our club competitions. Some have argued that because his image has been taken by him irrespective of subject, that is ok, but others are saying it is copyright infringement. Any ideas anyone? Thanks.

You are a little unclear in your question.
If you mean he saw someone else's photo, liked it and went out to copy that shot with his own camera, who doesn't do that? (Say the moon) You can't copyright the moon!

If on the other hand you mean he downloaded someone else's photo from their page and entered it as his own, he stole that image! and should be punished.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

dilong wrote:

Sorry, to clarify we think what the club member has done is taken a photograph of a photograph and/or picture. So presumably one way of doing this would be to download an image, print it, and then photograph the print. He is doing rather well in competitions at the moment.

There are only two ways I know of to accomplish that legally.

One is if the third party image is only incidental to his photograph. For example, if a painting or photograph is displayed in the window of a store front and you shoot a picture of the entire store front that does include the copyright image on display, it is not a copyright violation. That does not appear to be what you suspect...

Another is if a copyright image is the starting point, but a creative process is applied that make a virtually total transformation in terms of creativity is applied. (I've never been able to understand where to draw the line on that, so if this is the case you need to do some research.)

Anything approaching just a straight copy of another image is almost certain to be a copyright violation.

Then the question is, what evidence do you have?

Capture48 Loc: Arizona

dilong wrote:

Sorry, to clarify we think what the club member has done is taken a photograph of a photograph and/or picture. So presumably one way of doing this would be to download an image, print it, and then photograph the print. He is doing rather well in competitions at the moment.

I'm having a little trouble understanding why someone would do this? Why not just download a re-submit the photo as his/her own? It makes no sense to print, then photograph it, them submit. The extra step of photographing a photograph is not necessary since either gets you the same thing.

mdsiamese Loc: Maryland

dilong wrote:

Hi. A member of our camera club has recently been suspected of entering photos of other people's images into our club competitions. Some have argued that because his image has been taken by him irrespective of subject, that is ok, but others are saying it is copyright infringement. Any ideas anyone? Thanks.

A photo of someone else's photo is a reproduction and therefore a copyright infringement. It's the same as taking the original photo and making a copy with a copying machine at Staples. A copying machine is just a camera, all this person is doing is using a camera the same way as he would a copying machine. Whether the rules of your club allow this is irrelevant - he is violating copyright if he is reproducing someone else's photo. If I were in your club, I'd want to protect the club from any liability and try to prevent copyright infringement in your contests.