Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Other Stuff
Off Topic
Unexpected price for news article
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AC016" data-source="post: 410145" data-attributes="member: 9619"><p>However, Scott's intention at the time he took the photo, was NOT to sell it. According to the parks rule, if you go into the park with the intention of taking photos for commercial use/selling them, you need the permit. Again, that was not Scott's intention when he took that photo over a year ago. In this case, the park would have to prove that Scott had the intention of selling the photo at the time of pressing the shutter button. The letter they sent him, seems to be a "hail mary" kind of letter, in that they are hoping that he will just cough up the money without a fight. Just think of how much time/money they are wasting going after $30 AUD..... i am pretty sure they will just drop it and have the letter serve Scott as a warning/reminder.</p><p></p><p>Stealing a photo from someones website is entirely different. Copyright laws dictate that once your press the shutter button, that photo belongs to you, it is your "property". When someone takes a photo from my blog, it is theft. Plain and simple. Scott taking a photo of nature, is not stealing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AC016, post: 410145, member: 9619"] However, Scott's intention at the time he took the photo, was NOT to sell it. According to the parks rule, if you go into the park with the intention of taking photos for commercial use/selling them, you need the permit. Again, that was not Scott's intention when he took that photo over a year ago. In this case, the park would have to prove that Scott had the intention of selling the photo at the time of pressing the shutter button. The letter they sent him, seems to be a "hail mary" kind of letter, in that they are hoping that he will just cough up the money without a fight. Just think of how much time/money they are wasting going after $30 AUD..... i am pretty sure they will just drop it and have the letter serve Scott as a warning/reminder. Stealing a photo from someones website is entirely different. Copyright laws dictate that once your press the shutter button, that photo belongs to you, it is your "property". When someone takes a photo from my blog, it is theft. Plain and simple. Scott taking a photo of nature, is not stealing. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Off Topic
Unexpected price for news article
Top