Snapped Shot

Hey, I'm game. I've been burned by this torch before, but the more advice I read, the merrier I am.

And believe me, I'm darned merry.

I’ve been asked a few times by readers “What’s fair use and what’s illegal when using photography that’s not yours on a blog?” I can’t actually answer that question, because I’m not a lawyer, but I would like to help bloggers understand the best practices for using photography that doesn’t belong to them, so when I saw this “Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Online Video” (here) I thought I should create one for photography (and not 16 pages long), since it doesn’t already exist. There’s really no end in sight to the practice of bloggers writing about a photograph or a photographer and then posting a picture, so don’t you think it’s time we set down some guidelines on what acceptable and what’s not? I’m going to post the best practices guide on the url http://www.fairusephoto.com and I’d like it to represent what photographers and photo industry bloggers feel is acceptable. Here’s what I think:

Be sure to click on over (and visit here, whenever it's up and running) for the rest. This, along with Gabriel Malor's excellent piece, will continue to be Snapped Shot's set of "guiding principles."

Richard North over at EUReferendum explains the joyous new word "Bonto" thusly:

Bonto (Barak Obama—Not The One)

Don't you think it has that classic Anglican charm to it?

He also points out via e-mail that he intends to file no Copyright on the word, so you can definitely expect to see it over here constantly from here on out. I highly recommend the McCain camp work it into their vocabulary, too—Even if it's just for the fun of it.

Incidentally, it'd probably be a lot more enjoyable to use this word if I actually were busting a ©, a ®, or perhaps showing extreme disrespect towards somebody's ™...

When I heard Heart's classic song Barracuda at the convention last night, I got a nice, ironic tear in my eye. Because, you know, that's what Sarah Palin is called up in Alaska.

Being the copyright maverick that I am, that tear soon changed to tears of mirth, now that I discover that the ladies of Heart didn't really appreciate the gesture. (h/t Allah)

It's funny in the same way that Rush Limbaugh's theme song is—Leftist artists definitely make for funnier Republican sounders.

Anyway, I'm sure the good news in all of this is that the RNC has already budgeted for the copyright complaint ahead of time, and the whole matter will be settled in due haste.

After all, we don't want the court jesters going unpaid, now do we?

See-Also:

Jammie Wearing Fool, Jim Treacher, Beldar Blog

For the record: Since there seems to be a densoid or so out there, let me spell this out very clearly: I am not condoning copyright violations or other intellectual property theft here. I'm of the opinion that it's always a good idea to properly secure the rights to the work before using it, including paying any fees for the usage thereof, rather than "assuming" that it can be paid out in settlement afterwards. I just find the whole situation to be funny, given my personal experience in this type of thing.

What's that? You wanted to hear more about the AP's latest assault on the unwashed rabble that is the blogosphere?

Alright, relax already:

Fret not, fearless blogger—The Associated Press is not coming after you. They have been so busy pursuing a dastardly content thief that they forgot to mention that they weren’t trying to shut down the entire blogging world. This time.

Don’t you feel better already?

Be sure to read the rest over at Pajamas Media.

Brought to you by the comedy genius that is Sticky Notes:



This harkens back to the journalistic era of our grandfathers, which, incidentally, is the world in which the Associated Press resides to this very day!

The only thing that I can see that's missing is a "0"—Because that's how many APproved words I plan on quoting.

Blogger Patterico has noticed that the Associated Press lifted 157 words from his blog for one of its recent stories, without compensating him for the exclusive information he provided. This is comical, considering how the Associated Press is in the middle of a little snafu over a blog quoting their articles. Says Patterico:

Now, in a slightly ironic twist, the AP is taking content from a blog site. Namely, mine.

In a news item about the e-mail from Judge Kozinski’s wife that I posted on this site, an AP article lifted numerous passages.

I won't quote any more from Patterico's article, in case he's planning on charging $2.95 per word (just like the other AP). Be sure to hop on over and read the rest—And be sure to get as much of a laugh out of this as I am.

Thanks for the tip, Patterico! I am definitely appreciating the irony of this situation more and more.

See-also:

Ace of Spades HQ, The Jawa Report, doubleplusundead, The American Pundit, Evan Coyne Maloney's brain-terminal, Michelle Malkin, This Goes To 11 [Nigel—the invoice is on its way. ], Stop the ACLU, Powerline Blog, The Pirate's Cove, Below the Beltway, Confederate Yankee

The AP should hire Nelson Muntz to be their official spokesman.

Soccer Dad tipped me to this on Thursday, but I haven't had a chance to really sit down and go into detail on it until now:

Apparently, the legal department over at the Associated Press—Hi there, Priti!—has issued another legal threat to an online presence, this time targeting the news-commenting community the Drudge Retort.

The complaint itself has not yet been posted online (ours is here), but from the description provided by Rogers Cadenhead, who I suspect is the site's operator, the AP takes issue with brief summaries of their articles.

I've written about this in-depth over at Pajamas Media, so be sure to hop on over for the rest of this developing story!



Rush Limbaugh is discussing the Associated Press as we speak. Don't forget about we little guys in this story, Rush!

Updates: Daryl Lang, official blogger for Photographer's Daily News, has sounded off on this story. It's well worth a read, as always!

Also, PJM reader Mary points us to an online petition decrying the AP's bullying tactics. Hopefully, we'll all be able to get through to these AP corporate knuckleheads.

See-Also:

Shaun Kenney, Tidewater Musings, Gateway Pundit, Hot Air, Instapundit 2, Riehl World View, Free Republic, Shooting Star, Sweetness & Light, doubleplusundead (Foreigner rocks, incidentally), Fausta's Blog, Support Your Local Gunfighter, LGF, Boker Tov, Boulder!, Below the Beltway, Hyscience, BizzyBlog, Instapundit 3 4, Crystal Clear Conservative, PBS, Blacknell.net

Quasi-cross-posted over at NewsBusters.

You know that "good news" I was telling you about a few days ago?

I've been published by the kind folks over at Pajamas Media:

The AP threatened to sue Brian C. Ledbetter for reproducing their photos without authorization. But they didn’t ask permission before they grabbed Ashley Dupre’s pictures.

Be sure to click on over and read the rest. And then, when you wake up from your boredom-induced coma, be sure to check back over here for more fun and excitement!*

(* Fun and excitement may vary. Terms and conditions apply.)

Ooo, it looks like I got some Insty-linkage. Maybe that means it wasn't that boring! Continue reading »

Now this is an interesting development for the wire service that caters to terrorists first [Ed.:—I should've added ", the customer second." No bad joke goes unturned over here!]:

When a prostitute hired by former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer was identified Wednesday, news outlets eagerly published photos grabbed from her MySpace profile.

Can they get away with that?

Three attorneys who specialize in copyright law say media organizations are sailing in dangerous waters if they publish a personal snapshot without permission.

"Whoever took that picture owns that picture," says New York attorney Nancy Wolff. "It's either an infringement or they [the news outlets] have to make a fair use argument."

Wolff says the news organizations probably decided the risk of a lawsuit was low. They also probably considered competitive pressure as other sources published the same photos. "It's a fast business decision," Wolff says.

The fair use argument would be a thin one, attorneys say. Fair use cases consider factors such as whether the image has been transformed and whether publishing the image displaces the market for the image, according to New York attorney Joel Hecker.

In this case, Hecker says, the image was not transformed and it diminishes the market for the image rights.

Of course, in my experience, intellectual property experts are always going on about "dangerous waters"—though, also from my experience, they do seem to always have a point. After all, copyright law isn't exactly something that's set in stone.

Be sure to hop on over for the rest. And if you haven't read it yet, be sure to check out Daryl's excellent analysis of my recent situation. Continue reading »

Okay, so for the next little while, I'm going to be going back through this blog's archives and flagging all of the stories that are demonstrably within my legal "fair use" rights for the wire service photos. I'm composing this list mostly for my own reference, so if you're not interested, feel free to pass it on. (I'll be blogging on current news as soon as I'm caught up with what's going on in the world, of course.)

For those of you who don't care about piddly little things like "fair use" and "article lists," I present this offering—The classic Atari game "Pole Position," played with humans. It will hopefully keep you entertained until this blog is able to get back on track with current events:



(With thanks to my buddy Ian for the excellent inspiration.) Continue reading »

Or is that "Move On™?"

(Oh, wait... Maybe referring to them isn't the best idea right now.)

After receiving plenty of legal advice (plus some very insightful input from Jamie, Charles Johnson, Gabriel, and otoc, deacon, Cristoph), and considering the position I was in, I have come to the determination that it is in my best interests to comply with the AP's request to the fullest extent possible. Here is the response I received from their counsel at the end of our discussion:

Brian,

This should resolve the matter. Thank you again for you cooperation and immediate response.

Priti

Whew. With this being resolved, we are now free to continue blogging—Though as you can tell, some things are definitely different about the site. (With thanks to Ace for suggesting the excellent graphic. It's wholly-original content, incidentally.) Continue reading »

We have been informed that the Associated Press takes issue with our use of their images on this website, and until I'm able to resolve this matter with them amicably, I'm going to have to take the site offline.

Please feel free to e-mail me if you know more about this kinda thing. I'm posting a copy of the AP's letter in the extended body of this article, for full disclosure.

Background
Snapped Shot is a site that deals with the criticism of photojournalism. The industry is inaccurate in its reporting, it falls for terrorist propaganda too easily, and in general, the photos that you see presented as "news" on a daily basis are nothing more than fluff. This site has, from the beginning, intended to correct that by presenting specific instances of bias or inaccuracy along with commentary as to why said photographs are inaccurate. I have never drawn a profit from this website, and have never received compensation for any of the "copyrighted" works that are owned by the AP. Furthermore, I have always been careful to give full credit to the wire photographers who have taken the pictures, and have even interacted cordially with a handful of them. Continue reading »