Nikon 2.8/6mm for EUR300

[Dr Klaus Schmitt]

Well, that cost me showing a picture of that Nikon 2.8/6mm lens here WITH copyright mentioned, but got sued by the real owner of that for copyright violation.
Lesson learnt I guess...

[MILLIREHM]

sorry to hear this

[Akira]

Well, that cost me showing a picture of that Nikon 2.8/6mm lens here WITH copyright mentioned, but got sued by the real owner of that for copyright violation.
Lesson learnt I guess...

Oh, no.  Sorry about that, Klaus...

[Erik Lund]

Ups, not nice - Sorry to hear!

[MEPER]

It seems that linking to a picture on the internet should be "safe" (I am allowed to link to this document):
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/481194/c-notice-201401.pdf
It also seems that pictures are by default "Copyright". It is not necessary to write anything about it......as I read it.....(read it very fast so may have missed something).

…..but what was the reason for the owner of the picture to make that kind of "punishment"?
He could just have requested the picture to be removed in first place. The lens was displayed on a Nikon friendly site so what harm did it do to his image? 
It was "non commercial" use.
Are the fees for violating a Copyright standardized so EUR 300 is the prize (lens is expensive…..so maybe he needs some money)?
Probably it could be much more expensive to find out.....

[Frank Fremerey]

Well, that cost me showing a picture of that Nikon 2.8/6mm lens here WITH copyright mentioned, but got sued by the real owner of that for copyright violation.
Lesson learnt I guess...

I did in fact send bills to people using my work without asking or paying for it

[PeterN]

Sorry to hear that, Klaus. I think it is a bit shortsighted to immediately sue someone or ask for money. IMHO the more people share the photographer's work (with reference)the better known the photographer becomes. 

The situation becomes different when someone commercially exploits a photo or pretends he/she took the photo. That would be a reason to sue or send a bill. Fortunately that has never happened to me.

Just my 2 cents..

[Pistnbroke]

I dont get this .......
If you make a mark on a  sheet of paper its copyright,,but its also of no value.
Same applies to a photo of a common object (the lens) unless there was something special about the photo . Extra effort put in etc . The owner of the photo would have to demonstrate a loss because the law is only interested in money.  I have not seen the photo.
Why would you pay anybody without a court order  and a total of euro 300 would not pay any legal fees.
How did the owner of the photo get the address of the offender ??  So dont use your real name on  a forum.

[Dr Klaus Schmitt]

It seems that linking to a picture on the internet should be "safe" (I am allowed to link to this document):
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/481194/c-notice-201401.pdf
It also seems that pictures are by default "Copyright". It is not necessary to write anything about it......as I read it.....(read it very fast so may have missed something).

…..but what was the reason for the owner of the picture to make that kind of "punishment"?
He could just have requested the picture to be removed in first place. The lens was displayed on a Nikon friendly site so what harm did it do to his image? 
It was "non commercial" use.
Are the fees for violating a Copyright standardized so EUR 300 is the prize (lens is expensive…..so maybe he needs some money)?
Probably it could be much more expensive to find out.....

No standard at all, it was approx 150 for the lawyer and 150 for the photographer. Had it been used mor often if woudl have been way more..

[Dr Klaus Schmitt]

Don't get me wrong here: I did something wrong, but without knowing it. I'm always very careful about the copyright laws, also in forums I moderate as it has gotten "so common" to show pictures found on the net.

So take this as what it was intended for: a WARNING TO TAKE COPYRIGHT LAWS SERIOUS!!

Also since I work professionally, quite a few of my works have need stolen or used w/o my permission, but for me it makes no sense to go after that - not worth it, actually it is free advertisement ;-)

[Dr Klaus Schmitt]

Sorry to hear that, Klaus. I think it is a bit shortsighted to immediately sue someone or ask for money. IMHO the more people share the photographer's work (with reference)the better known the photographer becomes. 

The situation becomes different when someone commercially exploits a photo or pretends he/she took the photo. That would be a reason to sue or send a bill. Fortunately that has never happened to me.

Just my 2 cents..

This is my take too and it has actually helped to get known!

[Toby]

That is rather horrific Klaus. Some people, to put it indelicately, really have a stick up their ass. I personally have no problem with people using my images if not for commercial purposes, or unless they claim them as theirs.

[Dr Klaus Schmitt]

That is rather horrific Klaus. Some people, to put it indelicately, really have a stick up their ass. I personally have no problem with people using my images if not for commercial purposes, or unless they claim them as theirs.

I guess it is the result of "COVID-greed" - people sittig around having nothing to do, so they think about how to make some money easily....

[Hugh_3170]

+1

Quite Horrific.  Especially where the image was used in a review context.

That is rather horrific Klaus. Some people, to put it indelicately, really have a stick up their ass. I personally have no problem with people using my images if not for commercial purposes, or unless they claim them as theirs.

[Toby]

I guess it is the result of "COVID-greed" - people sittig around having nothing to do, so they think about how to make some money easily....

Really very sad. Some time ago I find some nice flowers to photograph on a strip of lawn in front of a church. I parked my bike, took two steps with my camera in hand, and a guy pulled over and said, "HEY, you know that's PRIVATE PROPERTY?" I looked at him in surprise, and said, "Do you think somebody minds?" "It's PRIVATE PROPERTY," he repeated. So I left and felt shitty the rest of the day. What is wrong with people? I think they are just miserable and want to make sure everyone else is too.