No photo of a photo allowed?

[Bradsdadg]

If they charged a more reasonable price, people would pay it. $1.00 or $2.00 to have it

This isn't 1970. 2010 prices would probable be about the same to email it to you as to have it printed out and bought.

 

[NYDisneyKid]

How are you missing the distinction here?

A DVD is copyrighted. As you point out, you can BUY a DVD. The copyright holder is being compensated (with money) for your personal use of that DVD.

The photo of you yelling and throwing your arms in the air on one of the rides at Universal Orlando is also copyrighted. You can BUY that as well; the money you pay compensates the copyright holder for your personal use of that photo. However, when you "snap a pic" of that copyrighted photo "for your own use," you are not compensating the copyright holder for that use. That's why it is (according to copyright law) stealing.

David

so if you buy the pic then you can take it home and scan it and print out several copies with no problem correct? people do it with DVD's or even download music and movies for free and burn their own disks.

 

[dqpowell]

so if you buy the pic then you can take it home and scan it and print out several copies with no problem correct? people do it with DVD's or even download music and movies for free and burn their own disks.

Technically? No, you can't. At least not according to the law. You want five copies of that photo? You're supposed to pay for five copies, unless the copyright holder expressly gives permission for you to make your own copies. You want to watch SHUTTER ISLAND or listen to that new song by your favorite band? You're supposed to buy or rent the movie and buy the song. (The radio plays the songs for free, but the copyright holder is compensated via revenue raised by the advertising on the radio.)

Of course, downloading pirated copies of movies and songs happens all the time, but that doesn't make it legal.

David

 

[tarrbear]

I really don't see how it is a big deal.

It is a service that Universal offers, and they show you a preview of the item you can buy. Just because they show you a preview of the item does entitle you to it.

But that is just my opinion..

True, I've even seen CMs at Disney scold other for taking pictures and stopping them from doing so. This happens at all Theme Parks, Busch Gardens, Sea World, Six Flags, US, Disney, they all do it.

 

[plummer925]

It is because of copyright law.

Some are saying you don't know what the big deal is...

Let me ask you (with all due respect!!) - Would you think it's okay to go on a cruise and photograph the photos of yourself that they want you to buy? Okay...how about going to a museum and photographing a piece of artwork with the intention of enlarging the photo and putting it on your wall ("saving" yourself the expense of buying a poster print). Or go to an art show and photograph some artists work...a photographer's work...that they are trying to sell?

All scenario's are the exact same. I know because my husband is a photographer and we have people come up to his booth at an art show, compliment the work, and as soon as we are starting to look away they take out their phone and take a photo of the photo we are trying to sell.

Just because Disney and Universal make money on these things does not make it right for someone to steal them. Yea, it IS stealing - and it's against federal law. Will they do anything other than tell you not to take photos of it? No, probably not. But that doesn't make it right.

 

[carmiedog]

I dont see the big deal with this one, you can view it and decide if you want to buy it. If everyone takes a picture of theirs, they wouldn't sell any.

For the most part, that's true. However, when we ride rides multiple times in a day, I take a picture of the display each time. I end up just losing the numbers if I try writing them down. I like being able to look at all our pics before deciding which one(s) to buy. I admit I do keep them ALL on my camera, but copyright aside, I don't think that's a huge deal since I also purchase. I haven't had professional photos done in years, but for my senior year and wedding photos, we got to keep the proofs in addition to the enlargements we purchases. I don't see it as that different. (I have several more of Splash from the same day as my sig...we kept waiting for one that showed my daughter, but she kept ducking down by her dad)

 

[Mtnman44]

Wrong. Emailing a digital photo is nearly cost free. How much does it cost you to send someone a digital picture? I wasn't suggesting what they WILL do, just what they COULD do.

This isn't 1970. 2010 prices would probable be about the same to email it to you as to have it printed out and bought.

 

[Mtnman44]

Just curious, is it OK for them to take my picture and sell it without compensating me? I can only imagine how many photos I've been in, purchased by other nearby seated riders.

It is because of copyright law.

Some are saying you don't know what the big deal is...

Let me ask you (with all due respect!!) - Would you think it's okay to go on a cruise and photograph the photos of yourself that they want you to buy? Okay...how about going to a museum and photographing a piece of artwork with the intention of enlarging the photo and putting it on your wall ("saving" yourself the expense of buying a poster print). Or go to an art show and photograph some artists work...a photographer's work...that they are trying to sell?

All scenario's are the exact same. I know because my husband is a photographer and we have people come up to his booth at an art show, compliment the work, and as soon as we are starting to look away they take out their phone and take a photo of the photo we are trying to sell.

Just because Disney and Universal make money on these things does not make it right for someone to steal them. Yea, it IS stealing - and it's against federal law. Will they do anything other than tell you not to take photos of it? No, probably not. But that doesn't make it right.

 

[phamton]

Just curious, is it OK for them to take my picture and sell it without compensating me? I can only imagine how many photos I've been in, purchased by other nearby seated riders.

There is a sign when you enter the park that says that by entering the park, your picture or image may be used in photos, film, or promtional advertising. I'm not sure of the exact wording.

 

[NYDisneyKid]

There is a sign when you enter the park that says that by entering the park, your picture or image may be used in photos, film, or promtional advertising. I'm not sure of the exact wording.

But does it also state that you may not take a pic of a pic? If its in black and white then I would understand. but just because someone says "you cant do that" doesnt make them right. If its a "so-called policy", then I'd ask them to produce it so I can see it for myself.

 

[WWEDUDE]

But does it also state that you may not take a pic of a pic? If its in black and white then I would understand. but just because someone says "you cant do that" doesnt make them right. If its a "so-called policy", then I'd ask them to produce it so I can see it for myself.

There isn't a sign when you walk into every store saying "no stealing"..

The fact is, it is their right to say you can't not do that because Universal owns those images, whether or not they state specifically.

 

[dqpowell]

But does it also state that you may not take a pic of a pic? If its in black and white then I would understand. but just because someone says "you cant do that" doesnt make them right. If its a "so-called policy", then I'd ask them to produce it so I can see it for myself.

There's no need for a specific policy to cover that, because as I explained previously, doing so is a violation of copyright law.

Universal also doesn't have to explicitly state that selling cocaine is prohibited, because it's against the law. Not the same degree of seriousness, obviously, but the analogy holds.

David

Edit: Crossposted with WWEDUDE, who made the same point.

 

[TraceyL]

Strikes me as incredibly greedy to worry about people taking a silly cellphone picture of the screen. If they charged a more reasonable price, people would pay it. $1.00 or $2.00 to have it emailed or MMS'ed to you would be very popular.

Sheikra at Busch Gardens offers an email version for $3 iirc

 

[plummer925]

Just curious, is it OK for them to take my picture and sell it without compensating me? I can only imagine how many photos I've been in, purchased by other nearby seated riders.

Yes it is okay because you agreed to it by purchasing the ticket.

Now that being said - I can't take a photo of you and expect to sell it (other than to the press - because of the Freedom Of Press, there is a whole 'nuther set of rules/laws there!) without your express permission (in the form of a model release signed by you) but when you enter a theme park or go on a cruise, part of the terms and conditions of those tickets are that they CAN and WILL photograph you.

 

[GetGlowing]

One can even be barred from photographing or taking video of buildings due to copyright issues. Crazy huh?!

Standard disclaimers when you walk on theme park property -- any theme park -- is that you grant the park permission to photograph or video you and use in any way it sees fit including advertising without compensation.

 

[humphreydog]

you better be fast on MIB. They post the picture for a few seconds and then add a some text over it so you can't see it. FJ timing is off so they just post the pictures of riders after you. Unless you run REALLY REALLY fast

 

[Josh Hendy]

Copyright law is IMHO just plain silly. As are all so-called "intellectual property" laws including trademarks and patents. To claim that something intellectual is someone's property is like saying that someone owns the thoughts in your head.

One of the best ways to detect a ridiculous law is if it is completely unenforceable. If you really tried to follow the letter of the copyright law you would be unable to do anything on the internet, or take pictures of almost anything you see when you're out and about, and you wouldn't be able to share any books or articles with anyone or do any scholarship. You could not back anything up or take pictures of many of your possessions for insurance (or any other purpose). If the copyright zealots had they way they would spy on everything that people do on the internet, or rather force the ISPs to spy on all their customers, and send SWAT teams to knock down the door and drag off to jail anyone whose teenager downloaded a song with uTorrent (*cough* not that I know what uTorrent is, I just made up a name out of nothing).

[I don't want to derail the thread too much into politics or anything, but if you find these statements outrageous (or intriguing) then I recommend that you take it up with the folks who have put a lot of thought into this at mises.org.]

But what is quite reasonable, is to make it one of the conditions of entering someone's private property, that you will follow their rules of behavior or risk ejection. It's reasonable to say, "If you want to visit us then we can take your picture and you can't take a picture of our picture." However it's kind of dumb to yell at people for taking pictures in a theme park if they're not blocking traffic. They would make a lot more money off their pictures if they treated picture snappers with kindly indulgence and priced their own pictures more reasonably, like the $3 emailed version someone mentioned above. After all, when you snap a picture off a screen you're getting a fairly blurry shot (I, ah, heard). All the attendants have to say is "Hi, if you don't get a good shot off the screen we could email it to you for $3." I would buy several of those every trip, but I'm not going to buy any more $20 plus "packages" from WDW. Too expensive, too much trouble to wait for it to be printed, too much hassle to carry it around.

 

[Mtnman44]

Josh, I think you expressed most of my thoughts on this very well. It just seems really petty to try to play the "copywright" card in this scenario. People pay money to enter the park and it is a given they will take pictures of what they see around them. To me, that is part of what you pay for with your $70+ admission. Either way, it just seems silly to display the pictures but try to strong arm people into not snapping a picutre of them. It is not like the photo of the screen is anywhere near the same product as the actual picture. If they don't want photos taken of their "intellectual property", then don't display them. The far better solution, is to offer cheap and easy digital versions that would likely sell like hotcakes if priced right.

Copyright law is IMHO just plain silly. As are all so-called "intellectual property" laws including trademarks and patents. To claim that something intellectual is someone's property is like saying that someone owns the thoughts in your head.

One of the best ways to detect a ridiculous law is if it is completely unenforceable. If you really tried to follow the letter of the copyright law you would be unable to do anything on the internet, or take pictures of almost anything you see when you're out and about, and you wouldn't be able to share any books or articles with anyone or do any scholarship. You could not back anything up or take pictures of many of your possessions for insurance (or any other purpose). If the copyright zealots had they way they would spy on everything that people do on the internet, or rather force the ISPs to spy on all their customers, and send SWAT teams to knock down the door and drag off to jail anyone whose teenager downloaded a song with uTorrent (*cough* not that I know what uTorrent is, I just made up a name out of nothing).

[I don't want to derail the thread too much into politics or anything, but if you find these statements outrageous (or intriguing) then I recommend that you take it up with the folks who have put a lot of thought into this at mises.org.]

But what is quite reasonable, is to make it one of the conditions of entering someone's private property, that you will follow their rules of behavior or risk ejection. It's reasonable to say, "If you want to visit us then we can take your picture and you can't take a picture of our picture." However it's kind of dumb to yell at people for taking pictures in a theme park if they're not blocking traffic. They would make a lot more money off their pictures if they treated picture snappers with kindly indulgence and priced their own pictures more reasonably, like the $3 emailed version someone mentioned above. After all, when you snap a picture off a screen you're getting a fairly blurry shot (I, ah, heard). All the attendants have to say is "Hi, if you don't get a good shot off the screen we could email it to you for $3." I would buy several of those every trip, but I'm not going to buy any more $20 plus "packages" from WDW. Too expensive, too much trouble to wait for it to be printed, too much hassle to carry it around.

 

[dqpowell]

Copyright isn't a "card." It's the law, and I (as a part-time professional photographer) am glad that my work can't be legally stolen using the kind of self-interested rationalizations displayed in the previous two posts.

I mean come on... "If they don't want photos taken of their "intellectual property", then don't display them." How can you write something like that and expect to be taken seriously?

David

 

[NYDisneyKid]

what about if you want a photo of a character? and what if kids are in the pic you are going to take are not yours? i thought i read somewhere way back on the disney side of this forum that the CMs have told people taking pics of the characters not to take them if they were not related to you.