Copyright infringement on RFF
- Thread starter Flat Earth
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 83
- Views 7K
Gumby
Veteran
Check your calendar, goober. Passover started last night at sunset. If you don't have a Jewish calendar handy... just try ordering from B&H to find out exactly when the holiday started. 🙂
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
...or old Yorkshire proverb - "people who live in glass houses........ " 😉
Sparrow
Veteran
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
While one indeed needs to be careful when wording one's messages, the owner of this forum has even complained at times about just this same issue regarding people using his photos from CameraQuest in eBay ads without credit.
Stealing isn't right, and if what the OP said is factual, he has a right to be upset. I'm not sure what one can do about it in the long run though.
Stealing isn't right, and if what the OP said is factual, he has a right to be upset. I'm not sure what one can do about it in the long run though.
Jonas
Established
I really dont see the point in this post. If he had "stole" your pics and text and sold another camera I would think of it as another matter. You original text and photos were originaly made for the camera which he bought from you and now owns. If there isnt anymore wear I really dont see the issue. I would say that the proper thing would be to include a text: "I bought this from seller:xxxx here not long ago and there isnt anymore wear so im using his photos and text for my own convenience", but I personally wouldnt care and I make my sole living of photography. This is because they are made for the camera which he has bought from you. It would be another matter if he had posted the same ad for a different camera IMO. You have no use of the text or pics, but he has. I also think that he could have asked you first, but I personally wouldnt be upset about the matter... Just my 2 cent...
sos314
collateral jamage
i saw morrissey last night. as always, damn fine show. i took a picture from the balcony. i am a thief.
pesphoto
Veteran
I saw Seal 2 nights ago.....he was taking pictures of the audience with his M8.......Can I sue him?
back alley
IMAGES
ok, calm down everyone!!!
first, let me say that my position here as moderator is a VOLUNTEER gig, no payment whatsoever.
i have limited time for moderating, i also have a full time job and my boss expects a few minutes of work each day, at least.
now, let me say that i emailed the op and the seller early this morning and set the rules, 'fix this or i will pull the ad.'
the complaint was deleted from the ad as it was obnoxious and it also broke the 'no negative comments' rule.
if i do not hear from the seller then i will pull the ad.
can i go back to my nap now?
joe
first, let me say that my position here as moderator is a VOLUNTEER gig, no payment whatsoever.
i have limited time for moderating, i also have a full time job and my boss expects a few minutes of work each day, at least.
now, let me say that i emailed the op and the seller early this morning and set the rules, 'fix this or i will pull the ad.'
the complaint was deleted from the ad as it was obnoxious and it also broke the 'no negative comments' rule.
if i do not hear from the seller then i will pull the ad.
can i go back to my nap now?
joe
gb hill
Veteran
Sorry! I'm just a dumb gentile that thinks every religious holiday comes on Sunday! I buy from KEH not B&H😛
Gumby
Veteran
Ummm... Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Christmas many years... all on Sunday?... what denomination of dumb Gentile are you? 😛-back at you. 😀
And you can tell when it's Sunday because Chick-Fil-A is closed. 😉
swoop
Well-known
You should give the seller his money back and have him return your property.
swoop
Well-known
I LOVE chik-fil-a. There are none in NYC. First time I went South I was amazed. Now every time I wander down there I make a stop or five. I learned there's one just North of Philadelphia. And a friend of mine say's there's one in the paramus mall in NJ.
I need a fix.
mknawabi
photographeur
Grow up. I sold my lens to someone on the board and they were not happy with it, so they used the images I gave them. The only reason you could have possibly been angry should have been if someone who you DIDNT sell the camera to was using your photo.
PICHA
Established
Is still the camera in the same state now? That's THE question...
lewis44
Well-known
Basically, your ad was "posted "as a description of the camera and the images were proof of condition. The buyer based his purchase on that and took ownership.
His using the statement and pictures that you posted, if he did not buy it, would be something to get upset about, but he does own it and you accepted his money.
Now, I would have let you know that I was going to do it, but really, whats the big deal.
It's like getting upset because someone is banging your ex wife.
His using the statement and pictures that you posted, if he did not buy it, would be something to get upset about, but he does own it and you accepted his money.
Now, I would have let you know that I was going to do it, but really, whats the big deal.
It's like getting upset because someone is banging your ex wife.
pesphoto
Veteran
cam he say that.....haha
nightfly
Well-known
I think this thread just usurped "what's your favorite aperture" (or was it shutter speed?), as the stupidest thread ever.
I can only imagine how the original poster must react to all the vagaries and minor infractions of the "rules" that occur in every day life. It must be difficult to get through the day.
While technically the OP might well be in the "right" it seems an infraction beneath attention.
I can only imagine how the original poster must react to all the vagaries and minor infractions of the "rules" that occur in every day life. It must be difficult to get through the day.
While technically the OP might well be in the "right" it seems an infraction beneath attention.
Sauli Särkkä
Member
The ad reads
Let me highlight a point.
Did the seller buy the item when new, then re-sold it to n+1 people, bought it back to himself and now, sold it, using someone else's images?
No, the point here isn't the fact that the images were not made by him. The fact is that the seller either
a) told a 100% lie about being the original owner
b) is the original owner, (at least) a second time
0.02 €
-Sale
Let me highlight a point.
Did the seller buy the item when new, then re-sold it to n+1 people, bought it back to himself and now, sold it, using someone else's images?
No, the point here isn't the fact that the images were not made by him. The fact is that the seller either
a) told a 100% lie about being the original owner
b) is the original owner, (at least) a second time
0.02 €
-Sale
