question on copyright protected photos.?

I can give you the legal details"

Chapter 17 of the US Code defines copyright. It is way too long to detail here so google it if you want the specifics. The short version is that the photographer owns all rights to the photo as an original creation of art. Only the photographer can give you the right to copy it (hence the term). This right can be total, i.e. you buy the rights and the image is now yours, or partial, i.e. you are licensed to use it in specific ways. When you buy a print, all you have bought is the print - no publication rights are granted. So you can't scan the print, photo it with your camera phone, post it or otherwise use it in any way other than intended. This is to protect the photographer's right to earn a return on his or her labor. Shepard Falrey is going to learn this the hard way when AP and Mannie Garcia kick his A$$ in court for stealing the Obama shot.

As to the moral implications, theft is theft. Why should you get their labor (and overhead costs) for free?

Cognito: You just screwed yourself. I, personally, will never answer another one of your questions. I will contact the other TC's and show them this answer and urge them to boycott you as well. Hope you wrote down what I told ya, coz I deleted 'em.

I guess you didn't think quite enough.

"They say the reproduction of the images is prohibited by law" you answered your own question. Taking a photo of it with your cell phone (regardless of the quality of the image) is reproduction. Yes it is illegal.

if you take a picture of it i think its a kinda loop hole, but at the end of the day is he gona check you myspace? and find out?

if your going to do a professional reproduction ie at a photo store then that is defiantly breaking the law

edit:

oo oo unless your in canada where the copy right it owned by the person/company that commissioned the photographs

Steal it. Are they ever going to know? If they do find it online, somehow, they wont know where it originated and therefore cannot lay blame or prosecute... but they would be able to get you to remove the pictures from online. Of course, once something is online, there is no taking it down. Then, of course, all you have to do is tweak the photo just a little until it becomes something entirely original, ie yours, then they cant say anything as it would be your original work. After all, if its a picture OF you what right do they have to say you cant use it? If they own pictures of you without your approval then they are violating your privacy. If you paid for the photo then its yours... otherwise, ask for your money back. I have nothing against violating copyright laws... I download off limewire all the time... artists should only care that their work is appreciated; if they only care about their pocket books then they arent artists and shouldnt be appreciated... its not like its exceptionally difficult labor snapping off a photo that is somehow diserving of all this credit and fame. Yes, I criticize all artists (including myself, and including every professional photographer out there). I will probably be down thumbed by those biased with vested interests, but oh well. It is what it is. I could care less for unjust laws... and digital copyrights are the fuzziest of laws out there. You asked in photography, not law, so I cant give the legal details for you... but I can speak to morality and ethicality.

That's right. If you want to use those pictures for anything at all, you're supposed to buy them. That's how school photographers pay their rent.

---

aded:

Cogitoergosum, I was just checking back on some questions and noticed your new repy. I didn't thumb you down and I didn't report you but damn, that's some rant.

I share your contempt for the RIAA, MPAA, broken and outdated business models, 70+ year copyright protection, etc., but your advice is unsound. Slightly modifying an image would only result in committing copyright infringement with regard to a derivative work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work#When_...

Legally as well as morally, if you don't want to pay for a non-free service or product, don't use it. There's plenty of indie music you can download for free, there's project gutenberg for books, the FSF for software, and so forth. On a personal note, I'm 39 and my life is turning out just fine without a stack of overly expensive graduation photos ;-)

Yes, it is a breach of copyright, not a breach of criminal law. Police won't arrest you but the copyright holder might sue you. Why not compromise and put a link to it on you myspace page? That way, unless they ask you not to link, you are not breaking any law.

The person who advised you to steal the image apparently does not not hold integrity in high esteem as a character trait.