Rob Studdert wrote: >Whatever the legal arguments I'd bet that very few stock image library >sites would prosper if they didn't apply obscuring copyright >watermarks (which nearly all do).
Funny, but I disagree; I think they would have no fewer paying customers if they didn't watermark their images (the people who *do* pay are commercial users who understand the law and are in business partly because of the protections they get from the law themselves). I believe watermark just so honest people can know where the image comes from. >Realistically you have to assume that if you place an image in the >public domain it will be copied regardless of the laws governing >copyright and the cost of utilizing the laws protecting copyright >might well negate their worth. I make all my images available under Creative Commons Attribution/Non-Commercial/No-Derivatives license. Anyone is free to use them for non-profit purposes. I think this is just an acknowledgement of the reality you described. I watermark them so that viewers many steps removed have a chance to find out who the photographer is and also, as mentioned previously, to have an extra claim against a commercial infringer. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
