Case Study 1: Flicker Picture
The issue with this case is who does this photo belong to. If the family
decided to post this picture on Flicker does that give another company the
right to use it for advertising. The company did not ask anyone's permission to
use the photo for advertising purposes. The advertising company could try to
prove that they were using the image for a different purpose than the purpose
of the original posting. They could say there was no copymark symbol on the
photo itself, and they were protected under the Fair Use section in the
Copyright Law. The problem with the company trying to use the fair use section
of the copyright law is that it could be argued that the purpose of this
reprinting was not used for any kind of new purpose. Also, it was used against
the family’s knowledge, which affects their privacy. Plus, whoever took that
picture still own the rights to the picture.
The pro for the company in this case is that the company did not know that
they were taking a real photograph to use for their advertisement. The company
believed that it was just a computer-generated image that was available to be
used. My biggest question is how they got the image, if they believed it came
from somewhere that was computer-generated. The cons are that this picture was
taken and there was no credit given to the photographer and there was no
permission from the family or photographer to use the image.
I think that in the business world this is a copyright issue. This company
needed copyright permission in order to use someone’s photograph for their
advertisement. Companies cannot use photographs without the photographers
permission for advertising purposes. Many photographers want their pictures to
be used and are willing to let companies use their photos to advertise, but the
company must pay the photographer for these images. Another issue with this
case is the privacy of the family. Children’s faces should not be printed
without permission from the parents.
If the picture was used in education it would not be a copyright issue. If
students used this picture and created something new with it then they would be
covered under the fair use section of the copyright law. Students would not be
sharing this picture for a purpose that would harm the photographer or the
family. They would be using it for an educational purpose.
This case can be used to remind users that images that you upload online can
end up anywhere. This family had no clue that after uploading their Christmas
pictures that one would end up being used as an advertisement in Prague. This
case serves to show why copyright on pictures is important. This family and
this photographer never wanted their pictures to be used, and no one has the
right to use their picture without their permission.
Good job
ReplyDelete