Ford owns your pictures if it is a Ford?

[OUCaptain]

Linky

They are basically saying that if I buy a ford and take a picture of it, they own the rights to that picture. This is absolutely ridiculous! They are really shooting themselves in the foot here.

 

[shiner]

Of all the things in the world to worry about I'm going to file this one right under "oh my god what if caterpillars rise up and take over the world?"

 

[amdhunter]

Damn, we should make an ATOT calendar with random pictures. That would be frikken awesome.

Maybe the proceeds can go to charity or something?

 

[lokiju]

Well to take pictures is one thing but there will be money exchanged for the calenders in question and thats where the issue really is I'm sure.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

One of the Dodge truck groups that I'm a part of got the same warning. Personally, I think it's complete and utter BS.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

That group should change to the Black 350Z Club or Black Civic Club. That would teach Ford a lesson...

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: shinerburke
Of all the things in the world to worry about I'm going to file this one right under "oh my god what if caterpillars rise up and take over the world?"

I for one welcome our prepubescent butterfly overlords.

 

[isekii]

If everyone on that site sold off their fords and bought some other car.. that would be hilarious.

 

[IamElectro]

I wonder if this means Ford is going to sue cities and towns for profiting from red light cams taking pictures of thier products.

 

[IGBT]

..take a pic of it in the service bay and see what they say.

 

[Arkaign]

Well, Henry Ford was a friend and fan of Adolf Hitler, so I guess the legacy continues.

 

[Kadarin]

They can say it all they want; that doesn't make it automatically true.

 

[JoLLyRoGer]

That's a real shame!! I personally know a guy who posts on BMC. He goes by the handle Cheo and has one of the nicest Black '69 Fastback's you've ever seen. And there's another member who is a photoshop MASTER that does all the custom signature images and devotes a lot of free time making the community better.

What the hell is wrong with Ford??!! :|

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: lokiju
Well to take pictures is one thing but there will be money exchanged for the calenders in question and thats where the issue really is I'm sure.

That's probably it. Dollar signs like this awaken bored lawyers from deep within their lairs.

 

[OutHouse]

wow that raises some interesting questions. is the the Ford Logo that they are basing this on because that is copyrighted. what would happen if the ford logo was blacked out would they still have a case?

 

[Raduque]

citrix, from what I've read on other forums, ford claims the image of the Mustang itself is copyrighted.

 

[SoulAssassin]

The problem is that they are attempting to sell the calendar for a profit. They are using the Ford trademark and making money off of it. No can do. I'm a big supporter of freedom and fair use (note the EFF link in the sig) but they are making money on other people's work.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: SoulAssassin
The problem is that they are attempting to sell the calendar for a profit. They are using the Ford trademark and making money off of it. No can do. I'm a big supporter of freedom and fair use (note the EFF link in the sig) but they are making money on other people's work.

I'm glad that someone understands here.

ZV

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: SoulAssassin
The problem is that they are attempting to sell the calendar for a profit. They are using the Ford trademark and making money off of it. No can do. I'm a big supporter of freedom and fair use (note the EFF link in the sig) but they are making money on other people's work.

If you think that, then all photography should be banned for copyright infringement except for outdoor nudes.

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: SoulAssassin
The problem is that they are attempting to sell the calendar for a profit. They are using the Ford trademark and making money off of it. No can do. I'm a big supporter of freedom and fair use (note the EFF link in the sig) but they are making money on other people's work.

If you think that, then all photography should be banned for copyright infringement except for outdoor nudes.

You obviously don't understand the concept of fair use. Also, it's trademark infringement not copyright infringement. If you don't understand the difference I suggest you look it up.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: SoulAssassin

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: SoulAssassin
The problem is that they are attempting to sell the calendar for a profit. They are using the Ford trademark and making money off of it. No can do. I'm a big supporter of freedom and fair use (note the EFF link in the sig) but they are making money on other people's work.

If you think that, then all photography should be banned for copyright infringement except for outdoor nudes.

You obviously don't understand the concept of fair use. Also, it's trademark infringement not copyright infringement. If you don't understand the difference I suggest you look it up.

So on a similar note, do companies like maxim, cnet, C&D, consumer reports, etc., pay companies $$$ everytime they review their product?

They ARE taking pictures of the products, and then selling their magazines.

 

[her209]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaustion_of_rights

For example, the ability of a trademark owner to control further sales of a product bearing its mark are generally "exhausted" following the sale of that product.

So does Ford really have a case?

EDIT: n/m

 

[mattocs]

Thats bullshit.

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: SoulAssassin

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: SoulAssassin
The problem is that they are attempting to sell the calendar for a profit. They are using the Ford trademark and making money off of it. No can do. I'm a big supporter of freedom and fair use (note the EFF link in the sig) but they are making money on other people's work.

If you think that, then all photography should be banned for copyright infringement except for outdoor nudes.

You obviously don't understand the concept of fair use. Also, it's trademark infringement not copyright infringement. If you don't understand the difference I suggest you look it up.

So on a similar note, do companies like maxim, cnet, C&D, consumer reports, etc., pay companies $$$ everytime they review their product?

They ARE taking pictures of the products, and then selling their magazines.

They have an agreement with the companies permitting them to do so. Seriously.

Let me put it in geek terms. The New England Patriots logo is a trademark of that organization. The Madden football games have licensed that logo from the NFL or NFLPA or whatever. Ignoring the exclusive deal EA has, you or I can't make a football game including the Patriots logo and sell it for a profit. I could make a custom Patriots wallpaper and upload it to various sites for free but I couldn't legally take that wallpaper and sell it for 50 cents a download.


How Do You Know If It's Fair Use?

There are no clear-cut rules for deciding what's fair use and there are no "automatic" classes of fair uses. Fair use is decided by a judge, on a case by case basis, after balancing the four factors listed in section 107 of the Copyright statute. The factors to be considered include:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes -- Courts are more likely to find fair use where the use is for noncommercial purposes.
2. The nature of the copyrighted work -- A particular use is more likely to be fair where the copied work is factual rather than creative.
3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole -- A court will balance this factor toward a finding of fair use where the amount taken is small or insignificant in proportion to the overall work.
4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work -- If the court finds the newly created work is not a substitute product for the copyrighted work, it will be more likely to weigh this factor in favor of fair use.

 

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: IamElectro
I wonder if this means Ford is going to sue cities and towns for profiting from red light cams taking pictures of thier products.

Might help them turn a profit.