Formal Appology
#76
Well ebay deleted my thread...due to the fact that I someone here posted that it was fraudulent...so they even cancelled my new thread...SO there is another $5 in listing fees downt he drain. Relisting again:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...MESE%3AIT&rd=1
ADAM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...MESE%3AIT&rd=1
ADAM
#77
Originally Posted by Leland Pate
Exactly how is any ole photograph floating around the net copyrighted? If I snap a picture of my car right now and post it on this board. I have not "copyrighted" the image, have I?... I mean if this were the case any time you swipe some funny photo and post it around you are violating a the original photagrapher's copyright?
The way I understand it, yes, one would be violating copyright law by swiping a photo. Unless the law has changed, the last time I checked, a photo is copyrighted the instant it's created, the creator having sole authorship of the image. No copyright notice is required under US law. I believe it helps to have the image registered under US copyright laws if you have to sue over the usage.
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wwp
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
#78
Originally Posted by Mark in Baltimore
Leland,
The way I understand it, yes, one would be violating copyright law by swiping a photo. Unless the law has changed, the last time I checked, a photo is copyrighted the instant it's created, the creator having sole authorship of the image. No copyright notice is required under US law. I believe it helps to have the image registered under US copyright laws if you have to sue over the usage.
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wwp
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
The way I understand it, yes, one would be violating copyright law by swiping a photo. Unless the law has changed, the last time I checked, a photo is copyrighted the instant it's created, the creator having sole authorship of the image. No copyright notice is required under US law. I believe it helps to have the image registered under US copyright laws if you have to sue over the usage.
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wwp
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
#79
Originally Posted by Leland Pate
...I mean if this were the case any time you swipe some funny photo and post it around you are violatingthe original photagrapher's copyright? That doesn't sound right....
#80
Addict
Lead Rennlist
Technical Advisor
Rennlist
Lifetime Member
Lead Rennlist
Technical Advisor
Rennlist
Lifetime Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 8,027
Likes: 16
From: Parafield Gardens
Originally Posted by Mark in Baltimore
Leland,
The way I understand it, yes, one would be violating copyright law by swiping a photo. Unless the law has changed, the last time I checked, a photo is copyrighted the instant it's created, the creator having sole authorship of the image. No copyright notice is required under US law. I believe it helps to have the image registered under US copyright laws if you have to sue over the usage.
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wwp
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
The way I understand it, yes, one would be violating copyright law by swiping a photo. Unless the law has changed, the last time I checked, a photo is copyrighted the instant it's created, the creator having sole authorship of the image. No copyright notice is required under US law. I believe it helps to have the image registered under US copyright laws if you have to sue over the usage.
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wwp
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
This is only correct if the photograph does not contain previously copyrighted content. Take care nowadays when taking photographs you intend to use in a commercial nature.
An example: It is a breach of copyright if you take a picture of a painting at an art gallery and you use that image commercially without the copyright owner's permission. That may or may not be the art gallery.
Be aware also that many items previously thought to be out of copyright are being re-registered. Many of the old masters are now under copyright again.
Copyright laws are changing all the time and the latest batch are bordering on the ridiculous.
For private use this is all covered under the "Fair Use" clauses, but for commercial activities including E-bay listings, take no chances. The average out of court settlement for commercial copyright infringement is between 350 and 1000 bucks per image used.
Ciao,
Adrian.
#85
Originally Posted by adams993
I have already changed it to be satisfactory to others.
just curious here. while i don't agree with posting an ad with incomplete or incorrect info, i do wonder why you care what this forum thinks? you have taken about as much abuse as i've seen on rennlist- and i've seen some wicked catfights here. why are you so eager to please this community?
in your apology, you ask for 'one more chance'. what? one more chance for what? acceptance into an online community? i only hope that you, and those who've been your biggest critics give your jobs as much effort as you have this thread.
your move was in bad taste. it's been covered. we should immediately get back to the "how do you like my new steering wheel" threads
#86
Wow I don't understand why you guys are bashing Adam. Did I miss something? So what if he bought a bumper on ebay for $350 then relisted it for sale there? Where's the harm?? He won that auction fair and square, no? And if he lists it claiming outright lies and misleading info, SO WHAT? Welcome to ebay.
As for using R'listers photos, that was bad form, nothing more. And he's making it right.
As for using R'listers photos, that was bad form, nothing more. And he's making it right.
#87
Adam,
Correct way : delete the images without permission, ask for permission and then insert the image with permission.
This is what you do: let the images without permission, ask for permission without deleting the images, ...
It's the first time I use my PC this week. I see only now your PM...why my car's picture is still there? I haven't reply to your PM...
you sent me an PM for using my car's picture
It was correct to delete the image without repl
without deleting
Correct way : delete the images without permission, ask for permission and then insert the image with permission.
This is what you do: let the images without permission, ask for permission without deleting the images, ...
It's the first time I use my PC this week. I see only now your PM...why my car's picture is still there? I haven't reply to your PM...
you sent me an PM for using my car's picture
It was correct to delete the image without repl
without deleting
#89
Originally Posted by DC from Cape Cod
I like the old Rennlist better....you people should try being a little nicer to each other.
Edward
#90
Originally Posted by DC from Cape Cod
I like the old Rennlist better....you people should try being a little nicer to each other.
Originally Posted by TheOtherEric
Wow I don't understand why you guys are bashing Adam. Did I miss something? So what if he bought a bumper on ebay for $350 then relisted it for sale there? Where's the harm?? He won that auction fair and square, no? And if he lists it claiming outright lies and misleading info, SO WHAT? Welcome to ebay.
As for using R'listers photos, that was bad form, nothing more. And he's making it right.
As for using R'listers photos, that was bad form, nothing more. And he's making it right.
Have any of you actually suffered as a result of his actions?
It appears he's learned his lesson, now how about all you grownups learning your own lesson. Teach grace by example.