Random Acts of MEESH.

gladysc:

themeesh:

gladysc:

themeesh:

sergio5ramos:

gladysc:

I took this one from www.sergio-ramos.com

I removed the awful watermark, added mine, wrote the source in May 29th. At last this one has 74 notes. I’m sure lots of people have seen it. I didn’t put it anywhere else.

Today, I found this one without my watermark appeared.

I know this…

I completely agree to this! Watermark things or pictures If you took them yourself! Don’t keep watermarking every picture you find and upload!

No. IT IS NOT YOUR PHOTO. DO YOU KNOW OWNS THIS PHOTO? THE PERSON WHO HELD THE CAMERA AND TOOK THE PICTURE. YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT PEOPLE STEALING “YOUR” PHOTO, WHEN YOU TOOK SOMEONE ELSE’S WORK. THEY WATERMARKED IT FOR A REASON: TO PROTECT *THEIR* WORK. 

You’re complaining about someone taking seconds to crop out your watermark on an image that took you more than an hour to “de-watermark,” which was really a photo that a person probably spent the better part of a day waiting to take. 

YOU were not there waiting for Sergio to show up. YOU were not there holding the camera. Did you spend the money to make the trip to where he was or to buy the camera? THIS IS NOT YOUR PHOTO. 

Did you even ask the photographer if you could do this? Because if they were willing, maybe they’d just give you the original. That’s what I did when someone asked me if they could use my photos from a tournament I went to. Why? Because they were nice enough to ask. 

I used to just post my pics freely online, no watermark, until I happened to find some of my pics online on a website. It feels violating. It really does. Fan photographers WANT to share the experience with you. THEY WANT TO and the least someone could do is have the courtesy to ask to use a photo AND TO POST THE PHOTO AS THE PHOTOGRAPHER MEANT IT TO BE. 

Just because you edited it, doesn’t make it yours. 

I‘ve said the girl from www.sergio-ramos.com has the copyright. I’ve said that. The original post of this photo I also wrote down the source.

This thing is just a example, because I just saw it on my dashboard yesterday. Stealing photo is not once for me. I also remove watermarks from public media like Alterphoto, Motivio, Gettyimage, Newscom… Those photo without watermark, can you say they are not my photo? They steal the photo just like this time, can’t I say they are stealing my photo?

I know which photo is taken by fans, and which from public midea. I always post the source if I know it’s a fan-taken. I was complaining because this post cut my watermark and didn’t wrote down any sources.

I still want to say, EDIT photo is just like second creation. Whatever I do, you can’t remove my personal watermark, that’s the thing right? I never remove other’s personal watermark, only the name of website.

No matter what you do to that image, change the hue, add the filter, flip it, crop it, as long as you did not take the photo or buy the rights to that photo, it is not your photo. 

You can’t prove that the person who stole “your” work actually stole it, because anyone who is well-versed in photomanipulation can remove anything from a photo. Who is to say that that person didn’t painstakingly edit the type out just like you did, and then cropped it to make a “second creation?” The only thing that can be proven is that some has removed the PHOTOGRAPHER’S watermark from THEIR photo. How can that be proven? You freely admit it. 

“I never remove other’s personal watermark, only the name of website.” I looked at that website. That girl uses “Sergio-Ramos.com” AS her personal watermark. None of the other photos that are in there have it. 

I don’t have time to look up laws and whatnot, but I’ll use the very questionable source of Wikipedia for US Copyright law:

 

There are five basic rights protected by copyright, sometimes called the five “pillars” of copyright. The owner of copyright has the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:

• To reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords;
• To prepare derivative works based upon the work;
• To distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
• To publicly perform the work, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, and sound recordings by means of digital audio transmission;
• To publicly display the work, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work.^[18]

Do you see that second one? “[The owner of copyright has the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following] To prepare derivative works based upon the work.” You never did answer my question about getting permission to edit their work. 

Oh and BTW, I call BS on that whole “second creation” nonsense. You can paint Van Gogh’s Starry Night in shades of purple instead of shades of blue; it wouldn’t matter how much time you put into it, it’s still you ripping of Van Gogh’s Starry Night. 

I don’t think you do this for profit, but unfortunately, for every one of you, there are several people removing watermarks and making slight photomanipulations for a profit, whether it’s for a better grade or for money. Fansites with ads are probably making more money off of a stolen edit than the person who put the actual money into taking the photo. 

In the end… do you really think you could walk up to EVERY photographer (whose photo you made a “second creation” of) with your version and say to their face, “Look, this is MY photo.” And can you say it with a clear conscience, knowing that you only did a fraction of the work?

If you tell me that you’d say to those photographers that those edits are your interpretation of their work, you should probably go back and recant the entire rant that you made complaining about people stealing your work. 

省省吧，懒得跟你这儿掰饬，几百字的英文，加上引用、比喻，哎呀，好一篇英文阅读啊！啊，说起英文真是伶牙俐齿，怪我嘴拙、怪我英文学不好，再怎么跟你掰饬也是无用功。我就会这么几个词汇哦，每一个都有被喷的点哦！呀，我用中文说话有没有触犯你们美国版权法啊？？这中文字儿既不是我创造发明，又不是我设计加载进电脑里的哦！有没有侵权啊亲？？？

照你这么一说，汤不牢上面百分之八十的博友都是在侵权啊！睁大你的巴傻眼看看，我写了来源，我就是简单的对她去了水印还不写来源抱怨一下而已，怎么就扯出这些幺蛾子了啊？？你是没事儿闲的还是吃饱了撑的啊？！那么多网友，每发一张图你都要去一条条评论，把你们伟大的法律搬出来说人家侵权么？

找你这种理论，沙治奥还要抱怨呢，你们给他肖像费了么？你每张照片都问他我能拍照了么？？拿图的，那么多网友，他们每次都要向图片社询问能否转载么？你还允许皮埃斯这种东西的存在么？皮埃斯一张图还要去向拍照片的人询问么？赶拍着胸脯说，自己从来没有转发过稀罕的图片，从来没有皮埃斯过么？

我看你就是生活太寂寞空虚了吧？满腹怨气没事儿找我喷？想继续么？我不在乎啊！我还好心拿英文回复你呢！还想继续？想继续赶紧学门外语去吧！

玛勒戈壁的

Wow, that’s pretty shady to switch the arguement from English to your language. I used google translate to get the English version, but unfortunately - but, of course, very common for google translate - it’s terrible and even trying to respond would be futile because the translation is literal. Your English is very good, so I don’t see why you felt the need to respond in your native language.

Like I said before, there’s no way to prove she didn’t just do the same thing you did. You’re not the only person in the world who knows how to remove a watermark. 

The image she posted has been manipulated too. Assuming she did steal “your” photo, she didn’t just crop out your name. She opened the image in photo editing software (or a website, I’ve always used photoshop, maybe they have these now) and edited the photo to give it a vintage look. Doesn’t that make it a third creation and therefore make that picture now hers under your standards?

Hell, she could even be Anna (photo is filed under Annas photos, for third party readers). What then? Is she not allowed to edit her own photos? 

 Oh and about that parting shot you left me at the end of your Chinese rant: my life is sad and lonely. I’ve been through a lot, especially in the past two years and I have a lovely, self-inflicted scar to prove it. I don’t want sympathy for my the choices I’ve made in my life, but I’m just going to confirm the thought you have of me as being a general loser. I didn’t insult you or your lifestyle or even your choice to take someone else photo and remove the watermark. I’m trying to tell you that calling it “your photo” is wrong. You say you sourced it to the person who really took the photo, but then why would you complain and say “do not steal my photos.” That makes no sense. I mean you said you’re not the photographer and I’m pretty sure you’re not Sergio Ramos, plus there’s no other body in the photo. What makes this photo yours? 

I hope that you never find photos you took with your own camera, edited by someone you don’t know, because the anger you feel at that person you think took ‘your’ work would be escalated by about 100 fold. 

gladysc:

themeesh:

sergio5ramos:

gladysc:

I took this one from www.sergio-ramos.com

I removed the awful watermark, added mine, wrote the source in May 29th. At last this one has 74 notes. I’m sure lots of people have seen it. I didn’t put it anywhere else.

Today, I found this one without my watermark appeared.

I know this…

I completely agree to this! Watermark things or pictures If you took them yourself! Don’t keep watermarking every picture you find and upload!

No. IT IS NOT YOUR PHOTO. DO YOU KNOW OWNS THIS PHOTO? THE PERSON WHO HELD THE CAMERA AND TOOK THE PICTURE. YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT PEOPLE STEALING “YOUR” PHOTO, WHEN YOU TOOK SOMEONE ELSE’S WORK. THEY WATERMARKED IT FOR A REASON: TO PROTECT *THEIR* WORK. 

You’re complaining about someone taking seconds to crop out your watermark on an image that took you more than an hour to “de-watermark,” which was really a photo that a person probably spent the better part of a day waiting to take. 

YOU were not there waiting for Sergio to show up. YOU were not there holding the camera. Did you spend the money to make the trip to where he was or to buy the camera? THIS IS NOT YOUR PHOTO. 

Did you even ask the photographer if you could do this? Because if they were willing, maybe they’d just give you the original. That’s what I did when someone asked me if they could use my photos from a tournament I went to. Why? Because they were nice enough to ask. 

I used to just post my pics freely online, no watermark, until I happened to find some of my pics online on a website. It feels violating. It really does. Fan photographers WANT to share the experience with you. THEY WANT TO and the least someone could do is have the courtesy to ask to use a photo AND TO POST THE PHOTO AS THE PHOTOGRAPHER MEANT IT TO BE. 

Just because you edited it, doesn’t make it yours. 

I‘ve said the girl from www.sergio-ramos.com has the copyright. I’ve said that. The original post of this photo I also wrote down the source.

This thing is just a example, because I just saw it on my dashboard yesterday. Stealing photo is not once for me. I also remove watermarks from public media like Alterphoto, Motivio, Gettyimage, Newscom… Those photo without watermark, can you say they are not my photo? They steal the photo just like this time, can’t I say they are stealing my photo?

I know which photo is taken by fans, and which from public midea. I always post the source if I know it’s a fan-taken. I was complaining because this post cut my watermark and didn’t wrote down any sources.

I still want to say, EDIT photo is just like second creation. Whatever I do, you can’t remove my personal watermark, that’s the thing right? I never remove other’s personal watermark, only the name of website.

No matter what you do to that image, change the hue, add the filter, flip it, crop it, as long as you did not take the photo or buy the rights to that photo, it is not your photo. 

You can’t prove that the person who stole “your” work actually stole it, because anyone who is well-versed in photomanipulation can remove anything from a photo. Who is to say that that person didn’t painstakingly edit the type out just like you did, and then cropped it to make a “second creation?” The only thing that can be proven is that some has removed the PHOTOGRAPHER’S watermark from THEIR photo. How can that be proven? You freely admit it. 

“I never remove other’s personal watermark, only the name of website.” I looked at that website. That girl uses “Sergio-Ramos.com” AS her personal watermark. None of the other photos that are in there have it. 

I don’t have time to look up laws and whatnot, but I’ll use the very questionable source of Wikipedia for US Copyright law:

 

There are five basic rights protected by copyright, sometimes called the five “pillars” of copyright. The owner of copyright has the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:

• To reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords;
• To prepare derivative works based upon the work;
• To distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
• To publicly perform the work, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, and sound recordings by means of digital audio transmission;
• To publicly display the work, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work.^[18]

Do you see that second one? “[The owner of copyright has the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following] To prepare derivative works based upon the work.” You never did answer my question about getting permission to edit their work. 

Oh and BTW, I call BS on that whole “second creation” nonsense. You can paint Van Gogh’s Starry Night in shades of purple instead of shades of blue; it wouldn’t matter how much time you put into it, it’s still you ripping of Van Gogh’s Starry Night. 

I don’t think you do this for profit, but unfortunately, for every one of you, there are several people removing watermarks and making slight photomanipulations for a profit, whether it’s for a better grade or for money. Fansites with ads are probably making more money off of a stolen edit than the person who put the actual money into taking the photo. 

In the end… do you really think you could walk up to EVERY photographer (whose photo you made a “second creation” of) with your version and say to their face, “Look, this is MY photo.” And can you say it with a clear conscience, knowing that you only did a fraction of the work?

If you tell me that you’d say to those photographers that those edits are your interpretation of their work, you should probably go back and recant the entire rant that you made complaining about people stealing your work.