Re: Photo Update - Gliders, Insulators, Nursery
- From: Alienjones <Alienjones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 14:16:40 +1000
JT's Ghost wrote:
- JT
can't wait to see your posted proof that Paul stole your photos
If you had been in the loop for a few months, you'd know he illegally downloaded some photos of mine (an aircraft and some flowers) off my web site. Photos I had posted to demonstrate how little difference there is in P&S and DSLR image quality.
The swine altered those web quality images to produce an entirely different and significantly lower quality look from the P&S image and then uploaded them to his own web site without so much as a how-de-do to me for him having stolen them.
The man is in for a big awakening really quickly. Don't even think of defending him because that will only make you look as if you condone people stealing professional Photographer's images, altering them in a degrading manner and reposting them as if they owned them.
My original article is here: http://www.douglasjames.com.au/previews/07-09-07.htm
His plagiarized (stolen and made to look like his own work) version is here: http://edgehill.net/Misc/photography/20d-fz50
In case you have an issue with DMC legislation and the way it can be use by those outside the US to sue US citizens who have no regard for the law and do this sort of thing to bully others in newsgroups...
http://www.mcanerin.com/EN/articles/
My image were clearly and significantly listed as copyrighted images. After he modified them to look significantly lower quality than they were originally posted, he attempted to discredit me for suggesting the quality of a print was so insignificant as to put into question the whole P&S/DSLR issue of cost related quality.
Had he asked for the originals (not that I'd have given them to him) the outcome from his deliberate attempt to discredit me may have been significantly different. He made no communication with me. Didn't ask for the images and refused to remove them when told to. What does that saw about the man?
An hour ago I issued instructions to my awyers to proceed with action under the DMC against him and his hosting company who simply ignored my take-down notice. He has ignored 3 separate and correctly formatted take-down notices. His host has ignored theirs at their own peril.
The penalty - incidentally for his host is $30,000 per image for not taking them down.
Which idiotic landscape gardener who tries to come across as a knowledgeable photographer, do you think they'll pass on the legal costs to?
I am an Australian Qualified, Professional Photographer who has had it with idiots who think the only time they do any wrong is when they get dragged into court. If that's what it takes to make them tow the line, it is going to happen.
To verify my messages and ensure they are not forgeries send a message to: verify-at-douglasjames-dot-com-dot-au with verify in the subject line.
You will get back my the public key which if you store my address in your contacts, will either validate or reject any newsgroup post I make as you open it.
--
from Douglas,
If my PGP key is missing, the
post is a forgery. Ignore it.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Photo Update - Gliders, Insulators, Nursery
- From: XxYyZz
- Re: Photo Update - Gliders, Insulators, Nursery
- References:
- Re: Photo Update - Gliders, Insulators, Nursery
- From: Alienjones
- Re: Photo Update - Gliders, Insulators, Nursery
- From: Alienjones
- Re: Photo Update - Gliders, Insulators, Nursery
- Prev by Date: Re: Photo Update - Gliders, Insulators, Nursery
- Next by Date: Re: Photo Update - Gliders, Insulators, Nursery
- Previous by thread: Re: Photo Update - Gliders, Insulators, Nursery
- Next by thread: Re: Photo Update - Gliders, Insulators, Nursery
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|