Comments on Bloggers legal rights to use photographs continued | Real Lawyers Have Blogs http://kevin.lexblog.com/2007/03/articles/cool-stuff/bloggers-legal-rights-to-use-photographs-continued/ My post highlighting a lawsuit arising out the online use of a photograph drew some attention from Darren Rowse and then some criticism as to a bloggers right to use photographs. Rightfully so, as I did not really do justice... en-us Copyright 2010 Sun, 04 Mar 2007 06:54:32 -0800 Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:24:07 -0800 http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss kandkcards@windstream.net (InfoXtreme) The issue that is going to always come up is when a photo is used along with negative/false and/or personal comments about an individual. If the photo is used without permission & has not been published anywhere, where would this fall? And for example, if someone had a college picture printed in their annual & knew it would be posted on-line, then are they giving up any and all rights when it is concerned to that photo just because they allowed one source to publish it? I wouldn't think so, because if that was the case, then the Tom Brady photo or one like it that had been published prior to that could have been used... But then comes the "commercial" factor, and actually defining it, b/c if by posting someone's photo & "bashing" them gets a site more traffic, which leads to more revenue if there are ads on the site. This is a very sticky situation, and it seems "picky" but a situation just like this happenned to me- An individual posted my photo, which has never been published & was never given to anyone for any reason, with negative comments & also used my name in the URL such as http://www.SITE.com/MY-NAME-HERE.html.. The comments include statements with the names of my family members, address, & very negative/obscene comments (that are untrue as well). The main issue I still have with this is that the site is hosted on wordpress & when i contacted them they basically responded that I should just leave it alone & let it go away because if i didn't the person would find a better way to post it again. Then told me i could email Automatic about the copyright issue(s) related to it. Now think about it, even left alone the issue does not go away when someone types my name into a search engine and that is on the first page!! Now from here would Wordpress be liable as well? I am making an appointment with my attorney for next week regarding a business matter & was going to run it by him when we met. Your thoughts?

]]> http://kevin.lexblog.com/2007/03/articles/cool-stuff/bloggers-legal-rights-to-use-photographs-continued/#742321 http://kevin.lexblog.com/2007/03/articles/cool-stuff/bloggers-legal-rights-to-use-photographs-continued/#742321 Sat, 03 Mar 2007 18:38:48 -0800 mikeschinkel@gmail.com (Mike Schinkel) >> Homeland security... "I thought you went to New York City to take pictures." Apparently not true when taking pictures of certain infrastructure like toll roads Kris found out, when the police stopped him and confiscated his film in the name of homeland security.

Shades of Oceania! Amazing how dystopian our world is becoming.

]]> http://kevin.lexblog.com/2007/03/articles/cool-stuff/bloggers-legal-rights-to-use-photographs-continued/#742322 http://kevin.lexblog.com/2007/03/articles/cool-stuff/bloggers-legal-rights-to-use-photographs-continued/#742322 Sat, 03 Mar 2007 22:25:39 -0800 ashish.mohta@gmail.com (Ashish Mohta) Guess the blogger have to make their own images.Sometimes they copy as its not mentioned that its copyright.If they know they might just think once.

]]> http://kevin.lexblog.com/2007/03/articles/cool-stuff/bloggers-legal-rights-to-use-photographs-continued/#742323 http://kevin.lexblog.com/2007/03/articles/cool-stuff/bloggers-legal-rights-to-use-photographs-continued/#742323 Sun, 04 Mar 2007 06:54:32 -0800