Complaints Department

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by StuartDH

The bits about the right to sub-licence, publish, use, translate, modify etc is again just a way of allowing us to maybe put together a slide video of images for community TV, or produce a CD with images about butterflies for schools etc, without having to worry that we have to get permission from every single photographer (possibly hundreds of them) before we do it...although in reality we'd probably let everyone know and give them the option to drop out if the wish to.

If anyone can find a robust legal clause that makes everyone happier about keeping their rights intact, while still enabling us to function and develop on and off the site without being unduly hindered by bureaucracy etc then we'd be happy to look at it. Although we still don't want members to post in unless they're 100% happy. If it's not for them then we'd rather that they don't post images, and thereby avoid any problems if they choose to leave the site later on.

Stu

The trouble is that legally speaking sub licence does mean that you can licence the rights to a third party - now i trust you implicitly so that aint an issue for me - but i can't sell an image exclusive to type to say a holiday brochure front cover if anyone else has the right to sub licence it for the same purpose without my consent. While i trust you not to if you say not legally i'd be commiting fraud. (obviously if i was selling exclusive to type on postcards, calendars, screensaver or anything wab might make then i wouldnt upload here anyway)

I'm absolutely happy for wab to use and indeed profit from my images - i wouldnt upload them if i wasnt - and in fact its not that big a deal for me as i have near duplicates on all saleables which could be used here

However my feeling is that irrevocable rights to non exclusive use for the purposes of the site/charity etc etc covers you without the sublicencing clause - as you are talking about using the images to make things to sell/give away not to resell the rights to the images themselves.

rights law is feindishly complex though so if you want to be dead sure you could check with BFP (bureaux of freelance photographers ) or i'll check for you if you want as i'm a member. Or you could run it past a lawyer - we must have one or two amongst our membership who'd be willing to consult free.

[StuartDH]

Yep, if you could ask a BFP lawyer it'd be interesting to see what they say. As I see it, if we haven't asked for the right to sell in the above clause, then surely we can't sub-license that right either.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by StuartDH

Yep, if you could ask a BFP lawyer it'd be interesting to see what they say. As I see it, if we haven't asked for the right to sell in the above clause, then surely we can't sub-license that right either.

yep will do - in my experience they take about a week to get back so i'll let you know.

the point is that you have asked for the right to use - and thus could sub licence the use to a third party unconnected to wab.

if you commision someone to make a calendar/screensaver/ film or whatever for wab they are using the image to promote the site/charity in line with the rest of the clause sublicencing isnt necessary.

also arguably you could sublicence the right to sublicence which someelse could then sublicence ... getting a headache yet

anyway lets not go round in circles - i'll ask the bfp lawyers tommorow and report back by pm when they come back to me

[denisg]

Originally Posted by eeyore

D'y know 'd neve noticed that -i'm fine with wab having an irevcable right to use my pics including in merchandise -but "including the right to sublicence" isnt quite so cool - as that could endager other sales which might have been exclusive to type. It also seems uneccesary for what the site does.

its fine for any that are on so far but i wont be putting any of my salables on under that clause in the future.

edit : if its just for schools/educational use then that would be fine but the wording needs changing to reflect that

edit 2: that said i'm a semi pro - these clauses need only concern those that sell their images on an exclusive to type basis - there is nowt for the amateur snapper to worry about

Sorry sir, but you have a very short memory. May I quote your post from 07-05-2007:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boddie
If you are concerned about rights, you have the right not to post your images. (end of Boddie quote)

(eeyore replies
I dont understand why anyone would have a problem with granting non exclusive rights to the use of pictures they upload - this seems like a perfectly reasonable quid pro quo for the services the site provides - for free, lets not forget.

the only legitimate reason would be if you plan to sell or assign exclusive rights elsewhere, or if you already have. In this relatively rare case, you would be wise not to put the pics into cyberspace anyway.

This part of the T&C's is not new to comment at all. The last time a thread looked at the T&C's and the outside images points, the thread was locked out.

The comments regarding Adobe have also been forced on a number of major companies running photo competitions to withdraw the same sort of conditions.

Any discussion regarding links to our own galleries will just not be tolerated here. That's probably the most carved in rock rule of wab. Don't even go there. Trouble is, there is no compensation either. If we use the wab route and stick to the rules all we see on the post is a poor quality, tiny little thumbnail that is of little encouagement to click on it. If we do it takes us away from the post to a seperate screen. In the old and most accepted way you can scroll between a visible pic and text at will and makes posts and threads more fluid. At least make the titchy thumbnail around 400px on the longest side to give us some idea of what we are looking at?. (Start high and leave room for negotiation!! )

Denis.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by denisg

Sorry sir, but you have a very short memory. May I quote your post from 07-05-2007:
.

new improved eeyore - now with added tact, doesnt get into arguements anymore so i'm not going to rise to that.

just to clarify i meant the bit about sublicencing - ive known about everything else for ages and am absolutely fine with it despite being a semi pro

i'm sure stu will be happy to discuss the gallery / vs ext link if it will make you happy.

[StuartDH]

Originally Posted by denisg

Any discussion regarding links to our own galleries will just not be tolerated here. That's probably the most carved in rock rule of wab. Don't even go there.

Here's a recent one:

Commercial Ventures

and here's another from someone you might recognise:

http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/fo...27-post17.html

Originally Posted by denisg

Trouble is, there is no compensation either. If we use the wab route and stick to the rules all we see on the post is a poor quality, tiny little thumbnail that is of little encouagement to click on it. If we do it takes us away from the post to a seperate screen. In the old and most accepted way you can scroll between a visible pic and text at will and makes posts and threads more fluid. At least make the titchy thumbnail around 400px on the longest side to give us some idea of what we are looking at?. (Start high and leave room for negotiation!! )

Denis.

We'd like to be able to do this if we can get the software to do it. Nothing too large because it keeps the page load sizes down, which is good for non-broadband and mobile phone users

Stu

[DaiTheDragon]

Originally Posted by DavyG

You agree to grant us a worldwide, royalty free, irrevocable, non-exclusive license (including the right to sub-license) to use, publish, distribute, perform, display, reproduce, translate, modify, adapt, create derivative works from any content (in whole or in part) you upload, post or email and/or to incorporate such content in other works in any form, media or technology now known or developed in the future. In certain circumstance we may also share your contribution with trusted third parties*. Copyright in your contribution will remain with you and this permission is not exclusive, so you can continue to use the material in any way including allowing others to use it.

I am not a pro or semi-pro but what happens if in the future a company wish to buy some of my photographs and want exclusive rights, as this is a possibility. A company will be promoting a new visitors center soon and will want to use images that I have shot at that location.

I do think if you use photographs uploaded to the site for any purpose the photographer should get some sort of credit after all even if I am an armature it would be nice if someone saw some of my images and decided to buy some. I think it would be common politeness to give credit where it’s due and I doubt you would have hundreds of photographer’s for a butterfly presentation.

Lastly can you give any instances where photographs have been used already, school presentations or any thing else it’s something we never seem to here about.

2 more on different subjects.
Why is it that when you go to upload an image you go to one screen, enter the details and are then taken to another screen to enter the same details, can’t you go to one screen and do what’s necessary there. No wonder newbie’s are confused.

Could the Links button be moved somewhere more prominent instead of being bottom right of the screen, maybe next to the Events button

Dai

[The Black Rabbit]

Originally Posted by StuartDH

Hi Dave,

Last things first, WAB is definitely not being built up to be sold on! I'm not 100%, but I think that as a charity we couldn't even do it if we wanted to...where would the profits go, given that nobody is allowed to make profit from a charity?

We set this all up as a charity because we're genuinely not interested in making money out of it...otherwise we'd have done it as a business. We don't have any paid staff and we haven't even applied for funding yet, and it's been nearly 4 years since we started. In fact, the charity still owes me a fair amount on an interest-free loan where I've lost more than I care to calculate over the past few years. Because we're a charity and not a business we also think that everyone else should be involved in the same spirit, and not look as WAB as a way to further their own website, career, business etc...and that includes not adding their salable photos that they want to use WAB to promote and then remove at a later date.

As for the clause, I pretty sure it doesn't give us the right to enable anyone to sell any of the images...it certainly doesn't say 'sell' in any part of the T&Cs. Even if it did, could you imagine how detrimental it would be to the site and the chariy if we did it. I don't we'd ever be able to make much money from selling images at a maximum 1600x1600 pixels and compressed to 80%. With digital cameras the world is literally flooded with images nowadays and it could never be worth the risk of losing everything that WAB has built up for the sake of a few grand.

To give a bit of background to why the clause is in the T&Cs:

In the past we've had the odd member who has contributed hundreds of images (one was over 800), then they fell out with someone (sometimes even off the site) and wanted all their images removed. So to protect ourselves against that sort of situation we have the above clause, which is very similar to those found on lots of big sites including the BBC and the Law Society.

The "if don't like it, don't upload your images" is certainly harsh, but it's also necessary to really emphasise the point when uploading images. We don't want anyone to upload photos that they're not entirely happy to share with the public. It's not a gallery to be used for an indiviual to promote their skills until they've built a business/brand and then demand all their images are removed so they can make money from them (and yes we've had that happen to us as well). The gallery is there a charitable facility to help the public learn more about wildlife and the environment. It's like sharing knowledge.

The bits about the right to sub-licence, publish, use, translate, modify etc is again just a way of allowing us to maybe put together a slide video of images for community TV, or produce a CD with images about butterflies for schools etc, without having to worry that we have to get permission from every single photographer (possibly hundreds of them) before we do it...although in reality we'd probably let everyone know and give them the option to drop out if the wish to.

If anyone can find a robust legal clause that makes everyone happier about keeping their rights intact, while still enabling us to function and develop on and off the site without being unduly hindered by bureaucracy etc then we'd be happy to look at it. Although we still don't want members to post in unless they're 100% happy. If it's not for them then we'd rather that they don't post images, and thereby avoid any problems if they choose to leave the site later on.

Stu

I do understand all of the above Stuart, (apart from the line highlighted in RED, which after working in the charitable sector, for a number of well-known charities in the past, I know to be more than a little naive I'm afraid! NPO status is full of legal loopholes - more's the pity).

Regarding images etc...
I assume WAB's practice of uploading photo's from fora into the gallery proper has ceased to be - I certainly wasn't impressed when 3 or 4 of my plant ID photo's (I'm no botanist and just wanted to find out what they were in the forum) were put into the gallery without my say so.
Its not the fact that they are of inferior quality, its the fact that I didn't want them in the gallery in the first place -but in they went, and in they have to stay?
This has ONLY happened with those few plant photo's I took, and many months ago, - but combine that with the Ts & CS set out for the gallery, and it may be fine I agree.
It just doesn't FEEL fine!
I still upload the odd photo to the gallery - I have no problem at all with that, but I don't upload a photo to "promote my photo's"?! I upload the odd photo to promote the animal that I've taken a photo of. I thought most did? Maybe thats where I'm being naive?
I don't suppose many have seen my little jumping spiders (as some members have alluded to), let alone the colour of their eyes! So I upload a photo to share my enthusiam in these marvellous wee beasties and promote them?
I took a photo of a nice spider-hunting wasp on a spider yesterday - something that again, I don't suppose many on WAB might have seen - so I'd like (maybe) to upload the photo to let others see the tiny world around them, a lot closer up!
I had no idea that I was promoting my photo's. Like I said, I upload to promote the tiny (usually) world around us -I thought (naively again) thats what WAB was all about.

Anyway -thanks for letting us air our concerns (not massive ones I admit), publicly.

TBR

[vole-woman]

"Without really wanting to go into specific situations, your recent post was removed because it referred to content on your site that you could have added to the forum and gallery/archive as a normal post...so there's doesn't appear to be any need to post it off the site and link to it."

- No, it wasn't that occasion I was talking about, It was when I was fairly new here, but an established-enough member to feel as though I was part of WAB and really enthusiastic about the site and keen to see other folk's postings and share my own passions. Suddenly my post went and I was told I mustn't refer to my own (amateur, 100% wildlife) blog. It felt like someone had given me a slap on the wrist, and I very nearly left WAB because of it. I'm just saying, be aware of the effect on people.

[StuartDH]

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

I am not a pro or semi-pro but what happens if in the future a company wish to buy some of my photographs and want exclusive rights, as this is a possibility. A company will be promoting a new visitors center soon and will want to use images that I have shot at that location.

That's some of the reason why we ask that images aren't uploaded unless the photographer is entirely happy with the T&Cs. It could never work to have to T&Cs in place that only there when the photographer wants them to be. Personally, if I was out and took 2 photos of a subject I'd keep the best one for me (to possibly sell etc) and put the other on WAB

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

I do think if you use photographs uploaded to the site for any purpose the photographer should get some sort of credit after all even if I am an armature it would be nice if someone saw some of my images and decided to buy some. I think it would be common politeness to give credit where it’s due and I doubt you would have hundreds of photographer’s for a butterfly presentation.

We allow a discreet watermark. We'll also be happy to add something under the image in the gallery as well (although it should already be fairly clear who took the photo) given that there's the member's name under thumbnails, and the member's avatar and name etc under the full size image

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

Lastly can you give any instances where photographs have been used already, school presentations or any thing else it’s something we never seem to here about.

We haven't put anything out yet, and the all requests for photos in books and magazines etc are passed straight on the photographer or we ask the person making the request to contact the photographer direct

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

2 more on different subjects.
Why is it that when you go to upload an image you go to one screen, enter the details and are then taken to another screen to enter the same details, can’t you go to one screen and do what’s necessary there. No wonder newbie’s are confused.

Yeah, we hate it too. It's nasty bit of design in the software that the devs are looking to completely with a Flickr style drag and drop interface, but no fixed date when it'll be in place yet.

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

Could the Links button be moved somewhere more prominent instead of being bottom right of the screen, maybe next to the Events button

I've added some info to vole-woman's post above

Stu

[StuartDH]

Originally Posted by The Black Rabbit

I do understand all of the above Stuart, (apart from the line highlighted in RED, which after working in the charitable sector, for a number of well-known charities in the past, I know to be more than a little naive I'm afraid! NPO status is full of legal loopholes - more's the pity).

Admittedly I don't know much about charity law, but I'd thought a basic essential is that you can't establish an organisation under the guise of a charity, get funding etc and then sell it on as a business and take a profit...not unless you want to spend some time at her majesty's pleasure. Anyway, whatever the law, it's certainlynot going to happen. We don't spend this long putting together something this big to sell it on, when we could have put together as a business in the first place.

Originally Posted by The Black Rabbit

Regarding images etc...
I assume WAB's practice of uploading photo's from fora into the gallery proper has ceased to be - I certainly wasn't impressed when 3 or 4 of my plant ID photo's (I'm no botanist and just wanted to find out what they were in the forum) were put into the gallery without my say so.
Its not the fact that they are of inferior quality, its the fact that I didn't want them in the gallery in the first place -but in they went, and in they have to stay?
This has ONLY happened with those few plant photo's I took, and many months ago, - but combine that with the Ts & CS set out for the gallery, and it may be fine I agree.
It just doesn't FEEL fine!
I still upload the odd photo to the gallery - I have no problem at all with that, but I don't upload a photo to "promote my photo's"?! I upload the odd photo to promote the animal that I've taken a photo of. I thought most did? Maybe thats where I'm being naive?
I don't suppose many have seen my little jumping spiders (as some members have alluded to), let alone the colour of their eyes! So I upload a photo to share my enthusiam in these marvellous wee beasties and promote them?
I took a photo of a nice spider-hunting wasp on a spider yesterday - something that again, I don't suppose many on WAB might have seen - so I'd like (maybe) to upload the photo to let others see the tiny world around them, a lot closer up!
I had no idea that I was promoting my photo's. Like I said, I upload to promote the tiny (usually) world around us -I thought (naively again) thats what WAB was all about.

Anyway -thanks for letting us air our concerns (not massive ones I admit), publicly.

TBR

We don't move photos into the gallery, we just don't allow external photos any more after the complaints that we did the above.

The simple reply is that unfortunately there are some who don't add photos for the same reason. Some photographers do only upload photos to basically advertise their talent. They've little interest in helping the charity and it shows when they eventually set up business and want all their photos taken down.

Similarly, there are also some who only post photos that link from their site, or only start threads or make posts, just to get others to visit their site...which often becomes a commercial site at some point

We've had our fingers burnt, and we've got rid of them now, but we certainly don't that type of problem to return so for that and several other reasons we ask members to upload and show images from the gallery/archive

Stu

[StuartDH]

Originally Posted by vole-woman

- No, it wasn't that occasion I was talking about, It was when I was fairly new here, but an established-enough member to feel as though I was part of WAB and really enthusiastic about the site and keen to see other folk's postings and share my own passions. Suddenly my post went and I was told I mustn't refer to my own (amateur, 100% wildlife) blog. It felt like someone had given me a slap on the wrist, and I very nearly left WAB because of it. I'm just saying, be aware of the effect on people.

I realise it can do quite a bit of damage and we'd like to avoid having to pull threads and so we've added the recent notices to the site that I posted earlier. It's very few and far between that it happens now as we usually spot the spammers a lot more easily...like duplicating their post and sending it to 10 other sites just to try and increase traffic

Stu

[SilverW0lf]

I'd like to say one major benefit of the image hosting rules on this site is that, in work, nearly all image hosting services (photobucket, Flickr, image shack etc) are blocked, and there is nothing worse than browsing a forum where you can't see the images!

This is also why the lack of dead links/images on older forum posts is a major benefit as well

[denisg]

Originally Posted by SilverW0lf

I'd like to say one major benefit of the image hosting rules on this site is that, in work, nearly all image hosting services (photobucket, Flickr, image shack etc) are blocked, and there is nothing worse than browsing a forum where you can't see the images!

This is also why the lack of dead links/images on older forum posts is a major benefit as well

Exactly, for forum admin these places can be a nightmare, although the red crossing can be for other reasons too, moved pics etc.. Tip, use url's from properties, not from the address bar.

However, in this day and age it is simple to set up own web sites and gallerys and for less than £20 per year. One host gives 10gb of web space and 100gb of bandwidth per month and considerably less problems (and hits of course!)

All do-able in less than 10 mins. If anyone is interested in taking this route on a budget please pm me. If enough interest exists I could easily add a walkthrough thread although Stuart might have to allow some links, well, maybe not...............I could do it without links but folks would have to leave wab to search about...............your choice. Maybe we should have a "Website Building" forum?

Denis.

[forfi]

How did the edible oil man get in past all the locks and chains?

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by forfi

How did the edible oil man get in past all the locks and chains?

mods cant see everything or be here 24/7 - if you see owt like that just hit the report post button. Hes been frozen now and i guess his thread will shortly be deleted

[StuartDH]

Originally Posted by denisg

However, in this day and age it is simple to set up own web sites and gallerys and for less than £20 per year. One host gives 10gb of web space and 100gb of bandwidth per month and considerably less problems (and hits of course!)

All do-able in less than 10 mins. If anyone is interested in taking this route on a budget please pm me. If enough interest exists I could easily add a walkthrough thread although Stuart might have to allow some links, well, maybe not...............I could do it without links but folks would have to leave wab to search about...............your choice. Maybe we should have a "Website Building" forum?

Denis.

Not really what WAB's about I'm afraid. We're not really here to show people how to build a website and there are already plenty of good books, magazines, sites etc that show how it can be done.