EOS 5D Mark IV
- Feb 25, 2015
I got banned from Photo.net for posting an image from eBay even though I got the permission of the owner before posting it and forwarding that permission and the contact details of the copyright owner (it was from a listing for an FDn 200mm f1.8 the moderator said didn't exist). Mind you at the time the EOS moderator was a real jerk who I think used it as an excuse to get me banned, but his reason stood up to the editors.
But yes, direct copies without permission can be problematic and even illegal depending on the context they are used in, however there are educational and derivative work exceptions so it isn't as entirely clearcut as a one word 'NO' would suggest.
A few years ago I did an experiment where I sourced all images for a technical presentation from the internet and contacted the copyright owners if there wasn't a clear license specified (about half of the images ). A big part of the copyright owners were really surprised at being contacted, they assumed that any image on the internet was fair game and were happy to grant me permission to use their images. Practically speaking they are right, which is a shame for people who make a living from creating their creations.
In the end it took me a lot more time and effort to deal with the images than
There also seems to be a cultural difference between parts of the internet, on some parts a complete post gets re-shared, in other parts only the content gets re-shared. When those run into eachother you get a lot of "Why aren't you happy we shared your work?" confusion.