Novgorod 1:100 gremir/pro model

[Paperwarrior]

Great thought utilizing a CNC machine. It can be difficult setting it up, but once you do it makes life so much easier to make more.

Jeff

[Diderick A. den Bakker]

Folowers of this thread may like to have a look at some pictures of a finished copy of th Novgorod on Flickr: New Photo Collection, via www.zeistbouwplaten.nl's Photostream

[db-sa]

However you will be left with no information about the sites from which the pictures were originally lifted. Apparently, in this instance at least, people do not need their craftmanship or intellectual property rights acknowledged.

[SJPONeill]

...more so when the images are labelled 'all rights reserved'...

[Diderick A. den Bakker]

Where is the harm in 're-blogging' a picture which is already on the internet? It isn't as if there was any money involved? I have not had even one complaint from the original photographers - do you really think not even one of them has noticed my collection in these two years, and the fact that they are on it? On the contrary: I have had several messages telling me that people felt flattered they had been included.
Almost 50.000 visitors have enjoyed my collection in nearly two years. Should I take your grumbling seriously and stop / remove this site? May I suggest someone (Mr O'Neill, perhaps?) takes over my initiative? It will save me a lot of time - and fun, I should add.

Oh, and by the way: in the two or three hours since dbsa and Mr O'Neill posted their negative messages, nearly 100 visitors to this site visited my collection: Flickr: New Photo Collection, via www.zeistbouwplaten.nl's Photostream
The saying used to be 'vote with your feet', nowadays 'vote with your click' seems more appropriate.

[3Turner]

Originally Posted by Diderick A. den Bakker

Where is the harm in 're-blogging' a picture which is already on the internet? It isn't as if there was any money involved?
Almost 50.000 visitors have enjoyed my collection in nearly two years. Should I take your grumbling seriously and stop / remove this site?

Diderick, if any or all of the photographers of those models provided you permission to host the photos in your gallery....for all intents and purposes, continue what you are doing. Although, I'd add some information of how you obtained the photo, where it came from and who allowed you to use it.

HOWEVER....

The harm in re-blogging the picture that is already on the internet is -->copyright infringement without the consent of the photographer. A photographer holds ALL copyright to any photo the moment the shutter is pressed. And in turn, has the authority to assign publishing licensing; be it freely allowing the photo to be reposted/reblogged/republished OR charging a small fee for that license.
And it is NOT sufficient to just put a name in a credit line WITHOUT seeking permission....the permission has to be asked of the photographer to repost/reblog/republish the photo in any manner. As it is posted to your flicker account with the copyright claim on the bottom of "all right reserved", it appears that you are claiming the photo as your own and as of this posting, there is no credit from the photographer giving permission to be included in the gallery you created.

In the end, you may have to be more selective in the photos posted to your gallery if folks don't allow you to use their photos for the purposes you seek. Just like protecting the copyright of paper models (digital or pre-printed), it is also justifiable to protect the copyright of photos by and of those who posted the photos to the internet to show....not to be reposted/reblogged/republished without permission.

[db-sa]

Where is the harm in 're-blogging' a picture which is already on the internet? It isn't as if there was any money involved? ......

On my way round about , here and there and elsewhere, I have come across some most interesting pictures.
I take it, from what you say, that you would have no objection to me downloadng them and reposting them to a blog somewhere, sometime, somehow.
After all they are already on the internet and I will not be asking any money for them.

In fact these pictures would be scans ... like to guess what of .... as a clue - they come from a Dutch site ....

.... ooh .. and, since you apparently approve my logic I wouldn't have to worry that I would be showing my moral double standards would I?
Of course I would be looking to gain cudos for my initiative as a consideration for my efforts.

I would need to overlook the fact that I once learnt (when on a jury) that in law such a consideration can be regarded as being as significant as financial gain (the bloke went down for 2 years ).



PS Don't get hopeful folks, I won't be downloading or posting anything, anywhere, anyhow, I'm just highlighting some faulty logic.

[Diderick A. den Bakker]

DBSA: there are no cudos involved, nor any financial consideration. And yes: if you want to reblog any of the pictures in my collection, you are very welcome. If it makes more people enjoy our mutual hobby, go ahead!

[RAFleischman]

It seems like the pattern continues.

Most sites that I've seen that lift pictures from other sites list the web address of the original site. Above and beyond the laws, it just seems like the right way to behave.

russ...

[db-sa]

Reposting from your blog - an immoral idea and you insult me with the suggestion that I would for reasons that have already been explained to you by 3 people in this thread alone.
But once yet again you seem determined to not read what is being said to you.
I can only think you do it deliberately.
Do me the courtesy of reading what I wrote and understanding what I was saying.