Monday, 21 April 2008


With regards to a certain Mr. Someone, a picture taken by you was removed from the post below. I refuse to give you credit simply because the photograph was posted on a publicly-accessible site, namely Multiply and there was no distinguishing water-marks or copyright labels on any of the pictures.

First, I did tell you in your site that "I took some pictures". You might have taken the pictures, or you might not have. Simply put, you were not holding your camera the entire time, no? :) Therefore, you do not own some of the pictures yourself, which means you have no right to post them in your site, since that's the argument you are giving me.

Secondly, Multiply is a public site. It is a public domain. The public domain is a range of abstract materials – commonly referred to as intellectual property – which are not owned or controlled by anyone. The term indicates that these materials are therefore "public property", and available for anyone to use for any purpose. If you have a problem with anyone taking a picture, stop posting them on public domains. Unless you have a copyright, you cannot ask for recognition. Which goes back to Point #1. A lot of the pictures were not taken by you, and therefore you have no right to claim ownership on them.

Thirdly, you have no control over the pictures you take, because once again, they are posted publicly with no distinguishing labels or water-marks, nor did you register the pictures as purely your work and no one else's. You did not claim exclusive rights to your pictures. :)

Fourthly, since you brought up a case of infringement, these are the cases covered by them:
# makes unauthorised copies e.g. burning music files or films on to CD-Rs or DVD-Rs;
# distributes, sells or hires out unauthorised copies of CDs, VCDs and DVDs;
# on a larger scale, distributes unauthorised copies as a commercial enterprise on the internet;
# possesses unauthorised copies with a view to distributing, selling or hiring these to other people;
# while not dealing commercially, distributes unauthorised copies of software packages, books, music, games, and films on such a scale as to have a measurable impact on the copyright owner's business;
# publishing someone else's original copy work and claiming you have made it (plagiarism).

Fifthly, there was no plagiarism. Refer to my blog post. At no time did I mention having taken the pictures, nor have I mentioned I own them. :) There was no claim of ownership nor authorship.

Rest assured, your pictures will never grace my blog again, until of course you make it official that you own whatever you post. A bit selfish of you mate? To demand recognition? Until you legally own your pictures, no one's going to be giving you credit for them.

Or stop posting them in PUBLIC SITES!

In addition, this issue was talked about earlier by myself and some friends over YM.
These are the comments on your site, and your demands for recognition.

******: that's bordering on desperate
******: point is
******: they jsut (sic) want to look at pictures

**** ***: he should be thanking us we're not saying who took the crappy pictures

******: hahahaha
******: to be honest
******: his pictures suck

***** *****: pathetic

Just keeping it real mate. ;)
Just keeping it real.



  1. Well, my friends never did that to me so I don't know how to react. ;P Usually, I just have to ask permission from them and I'm free to grab the pictures. (Good pictures!!)
    That someone shouldn't have done that since you guys are "friends."
    Tsktsk so sad... He's mad just because of the pictures?? OMG. GRABE NAMAN. WHAT THE.
    But then again, I can't blame him if he wants "recognition."
    *Where does he want me to put the "L"?? ;P

  2. dammnn...... i just tink that if you post your pic on public sites, it's a green light for people (preferably people you know of course) to grab em'. i rest my case. lol

  3. oo the drama! i quite wanna have a look see at those photos!

  4. Gayle: Exactly my point. Recognition my ass.

    Tabs: That's the argument I used, yet this person still demanded a link-back to his site. I guess he doesn't like sharing. If so, then stop posting them on goddamn public sites right?

    Rach: The majority of the pictures he takes are average, and some are downright horrific. I'm talking about blurred shots, bad lighting, shooter's shadow, out of focus shots. And he posts ALL of them up.

  5. Some people try too hard Tabs. :( 'Tis the sad truth.