Rendezvous Women

[Walker357]

Man are you blessed. I can't get my wife to even pop a cap with me.

 

[BOGG]

Congrats on 47 years of marrage. That's the definition of commitment.

For the rest of you fellas out there God made His most perfect creation when he made woman. What else on earth can be so beautiful carry the reproduction of the race in her body and love like they do. :bow:

You have'nt met my old lady :surrender:

 

[Maynerd62411]

Man are you blessed. I can't get my wife to even pop a cap with me.

She just doesn't want to embarrass you. :rotf:

 

[Walker357]

Probably true. :grin:

 

[Dave Rosenthal]

As a pro photog, I'm all over the copyright issue! In it's simplest terms, it's like renting a car. You pay the rental car company to drive the car from point A to point B. Pictures are sold as commercial images earning the creator an income. If you want to rent the very same car and take it for another ride next week, you pay the rental co. again. Useage rights and agreements also play into this issue. I shoot an assignment for you. Even though you paid me to do this, you aren't allowed to re-sell the image(s) to say a billboard company that charges $ to display my creative works...unless I have already charged you in an invoice for this specific useage. Or unless I'm stupid enough to shoot the job as a "work for hire", in which case I don't hold any rights what so ever and am not allowed to watermark the images with a "c" .
Awards for blatant commercial infringement are more easily gotten these days than you might think! Record Co.'s are now in the process of getting a huge settlement from several colleges (the Kids) that do the majority of the infringing.

That all being said, since I'm not paying you for the pleasure to be here on this site, that photo did not garner you income, so the probability of a suite going forward is probably nill, but the EXPOSURE to a legal problem could still exist! I would delete it ASAP and put something in the rules to make it a little less easier for you to be put in a position of having your "but" on "the line". I say this with all sincerety, since I really enjoy this site and don't want anything to happen to it All the best, Dave

 

[Dave Rosenthal]

P.S.: If you want to see BLATANT, check-out the beautiful copyright proofmarks across another couple of pix in this thread. If the photog was at a shooting event selling photos, he might also be looking at the BIG ML site sometime (maybe not today). Maybe he won't even show-up to the next Rondy 'cause he didn't make enough to break even? Nothing like getting shot in the back.

 

[Claude Mathis]

That all being said, since I'm not paying you for the pleasure to be here on this site, that photo did not garner you income, so the probability of a suite going forward is probably nill, but the EXPOSURE to a legal problem could still exist! I would delete it ASAP and put something in the rules to make it a little less easier for you to be put in a position of having your "but" on "the line".

1. Delete what photo?

2. The rules already prohibit the posting of any copyrighted material.

3. Very soon, this Forum will be charging for a Premium Membership. How do you see that effecting members posting images?

 

[Dave Rosenthal]

Claude please check-out post #327438 "c" Randy S. 1997 is plainly visible once you get past the cleavage. It's on pg. 1 of this thread. The copyright appears in the upper left corner.

Post# 368222 "c" 2006 R&M Productions is on pg. 4 of this same thread as we are on now, not with a single infringement mind you, but all 8 photos posted clearly show a copyright.

Once you start charging $ for this site, you'll be instantly liable and subject to the fullest extent of federal copyright infringement statutes. Call your lawyer and ask him. He'll be glad to charge you for an opinion...but in the meantime remember that anybody can sue the Pope. Doesn't mean you'll win, but you can try...and the Pope will have to defend Himself...and that alone costs money. You can win the case and still lose the WAR$$$$.

I'm deeply affraid to go looking at any other photo threads, but the lawyers won't be.

As I said before, I LOVE this site, and don't want anything to happen to it. I'm not going to find the creators and lead them to this site, but I'm a nice guy...not everybody is...some people can justify shooting a poor working slob in the back. I can't. Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not the web police...just don't want anything to happen to such a wonderfull resource as this site. Respectfully, Dave

 

[Dave Rosenthal]

P.S.: Every photo will need a signed release. Both by the creator and the people in the photo. What if the recognizable woman doesn't want her cleavage on the internet? She has what the legal profession calls a reasonable right to privacy. More fuel for the lawyers to make money on

 

[Claude Mathis]

P.S.: Every photo will need a signed release. Both by the creator and the people in the photo. What if the recognizable woman doesn't want her cleavage on the internet? She has what the legal profession calls a reasonable right to privacy. More fuel for the lawyers to make money on

I'm not going to debate this in the Forum, but no one at a public event has a "reasonable expectation of privacy". That's why newspapers don't have to get a release from everyone at a public event - That's why they can show your face on TV at a football game without securing a release. But yes, private photos and using someone else's photos is another matter.

Having said that, I am investigating my options for the Forum and plan to comply with the law. If the members are restricted to posting only their personal photos - then so be it.

 

[Dave Rosenthal]

Thank you. If I can be of any service to you, please don't hesitate to contact me at [email protected]. National Photo Associations have links to the federal copyright laws that unfortunately change from time to time. Good luck with your research and again, thank you :thumbsup: . All the best, Dave

 

[Claude Mathis]

Post# 368222 "c" 2006 R&M Productions is on pg. 4 of this same thread as we are on now, not with a single infringement mind you, but all 8 photos posted clearly show a copyright.

These photos were posted by the copyright owner.

 

[bmues]

......
Post# 368222 "c" 2006 R&M Productions is on pg. 4 of this same thread as we are on now, not with a single infringement mind you, but all 8 photos posted clearly show a copyright.
......
Respectfully, Dave

As Claude stated above, he researched the pictures in question in my post. I am the copyright owner of the 8 pictures with the R&M Productions on them.

Thanks,

'SnappinCaps'
'.45 Cal. Kentucky Percussion'
"Let's go pop some more caps!"

 

[Todd Rickard]

Here is one!
[url] http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w152/flintlockCAN/bandidas14.jpg[/url]