| Original message ([an error occurred while processing this directive] Views )[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Replies:
|
| DarkZero
196th Post
 
Regular Customer
   
|  "Re(7):Couple of new hi-res SvC screens"
, posted Sat 9 Aug 02:05
quote:
Not to defend a huge conglomerate website, but aren't screenshots fair game? Fanart, stuff created by an artist that they post on their own website, I can understand, but screenshots are always fair game, it seems.
Anyone care to correct me ?
Legally, of course they're fair game. Morally, however, someone spent the money to buy an expensive SvC JAMMA board and then hooked it up to a PC and then took the time to make all of those screenshots, and IGN just took them for free, marked them as their own, and is making money off of them. Someone else did the work, but IGN is the one profiting from it and taking the credit for it. By putting that little IGN mark on the screenshots and not giving any credit to the person that actually took them, they're lying to their customers at the expense of someone that used their time and money to do something nice for their fellow gamers.
Just because you can get away with it does not mean that it is right.
|
| Gen 1893th Post
Gold Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
   
    
    
    
| "Re(7):Couple of new hi-res SvC screens" , posted Sat 9 Aug 02:24
quote:
Not to defend a huge conglomerate website, but aren't screenshots fair game? Fanart, stuff created by an artist that they post on their own website, I can understand, but screenshots are always fair game, it seems.
Anyone care to correct me ?
The only one who can legaly respond is probably Playmore sense they would own the copyright on those images.
If a paparazzi published a photo of someone famous, legally the publisher would own the copyright for that photo. Although the celebrity can sue the life out of the other party if the photo is used improperly.
Celebrities haven't perused this but if they make any creative contribution to said photo they could probably have a legal say in how it's used.
You can vaguely appear to have been copied in a song for example, and if the other party does anything with the song or made money off it without your permission, the courts can award you millions.
Say you asked an up and coming celebrity to say hello to your video camera and you maybe even got him to do one or two minutes of acting. You have him run at your camera with a stick er whatever you want.. He's nice enough to do it, you don't pay him, and he thinks you're going to just show it to your friends, seems like it's all for fun.. Then say you edit that footage together with other footage and pass it off as a movie, sell it for profit, put that actors name in the credits, and use his name to promote your video. Sure he might sue you for that.
If someone published a photo they took of something that's copyrighted, a court might find that they violated that original copyright. Say an original batman drawing by a famous batman comic artist is copyrighted by DC. If someone takes a photo of that they may be violating copyrights.
Generally companies don't act like they care when there is no money or bad intent involved. If I take a Batman lithograph and send a scan to my friend over the internet, DC will probably take no action. If I use it to try and smear Batman's character in some way or if I sell copies I made on ebay, then their layers would come after me.
Aside from legal reasons their is the general courtesy. If someone's web page says 'you can tell others about this and link to my page but please don't copy these images onto other web pages' it's simple and easy enough to just not copy the image to your web page. I had a bunch of images from SNK's web site on a web page once, then after they added to their page something about 'please don't copy these' I took them down.
|
|
|
the universe and human stupidity
MESSATSU 
