Your opinion needed...

I think I would never invite Henry a beer after this, if I were you. And both of you will survive the experience.
Anything else doesn't make any sense to me, specially in public.

For the street art: As anything in the street, buildings included, you can freely take pics of it as they're placed in a public way. Some buggers may ask for Image rights for the architect, and some idiots may pay for them, specially advertisers, but if you refuse, no lawyer in the world will win any trial in Sevilla, in Barcelona or wherever where there's a city law telling their streets are public.

The owner of the wall where the graffiti is have as well all the right in the world to write a sheet with big letters acusing you to be ugly and antipatica, or simply to cover HIS wall.

that's how it is.

But according you are nice and simpatica, you can sue him for libel. (:D)

Good Luck!

PS: HENRY, IF YOU DO THIS WITH ANY OF MY PICS I'LL BREAK YOUR ARMS AND LEGS







--
Seen in contramowly home page (?)

Manuel, I really appreciate your answer because you bring me light over this. I got another reply over personal message in the same direction of yours...

I just needed to know some other opinion because I think Henri is not right in his conclusions but as this was a dialogue betweeen 2 different views, extra opinions would be very valuable to enrich the discussion and bring a different point.

So far, I have 2 persons on my side so I cannot be that wrong.

I do not want to take anybody to court (although I have an all rights reserved on the pic), I just want to know if I am right with my disappointment and specially the way it was all dealt with.

Muchísimas gracias de todo corazón, Manuel por acudir y contestar de verdad!

And thanks for calling nice and simpática too! ;)

I agree with Manuel on this.
I don't think it matters if it's for commercial gain or not. It's your photo of something that was in a public place. You have copyright, and to take the image without asking is wrong. Altering the image digitally doesn't alter the fact that it was your image, and to display it without even mentioning that it was yours is completely wrong.

Hope you sort it amicably.

Your view is very appreciated too, Purple T...

So far it seems I only get views of people who agree with me.

I have tried to solve it requesting a link forwarding his pics to mine but I guess I "have no right because I took a pic of an "illegal" piece that was on the street and I did not draw myself" according to Henri´s view.

I only want a link to my pic in his pics, since no permission was asked in the first place to manipulate the one I took...

We will see...

If someone had seen this in Seville and at home painted it somewhere would it have been different? Would anybody care?
Instead of crying below every single of his photos you could mention somewhere the alias of the original creator of this symbol if he cares enough about it, so that others get the chance to know. If it doesn't matter to him, whose case are you making?

I think the series Henry made is very nice. Maybe your friend also likes it.
About graffitti, it's forced public display, illegally smeared on walls, it's vandalism and in doubtful legal state to begin with. That's not a good ground to start any discussions on illegal use. Take a look at the famous london street artist Banksy whose stencils are copied world wide. He is famous, spreads his messages here and there. What more do you want as a street artist?

I do value your opinion!

The issue is not the graffiti itself and I thought this was clear enough by now!

The person who did the graffiti who I met only once was fine with the pic I took and did not want his name to be known. It was a one off and he had personal reasons for what he did.

In my picture if you see, there is a comment about how I saw the graffiti. There is also a tag mentioning the street where I found it... So you see I did my bit as you suggest very "kindly".

Henri´s serie might be very nice but he is not relating it to the source and that is my point. Funny how you say that I better mention the original person who did the graffiti but it seems that Henri is free not too say where he got the picture or saw it... He does not even mention that the original is in Seville and that he modified somebody else picture without even asking, I insist.

Let me stress that the issue about a graffiti being vandalism is totally beyond the point here. I am not discussing that!

I also like Henry's series. This is not the point. The point is if Henry would have spent 2 lines to ask permission to do it, He will sure got it, and probably would have win a friend in Seville (a great place to have friends, by the way). Now being cheeky first and quite rude afterwards he is loosing a lot of moriles and a lot more of manzanilla, besides making an extraordinary ridicule.

For the legality of graffiti I don't give a shit. If they're nice I clap hands, and if they're a pain in the ass I simply look somewhere else or paint on top of it.

*~Amimar~* , alucino que aun pases links a su blog, cuando el no ponen ningún link del material que usa sin decirte nada. No hace falta que empieces un pleito por una sola foto, solo ganarian los abogados. Pero, de verdad, no veo el por qué de seguir dándole publicidad al jeta ese. Que además es tonto, porque con dos frases de buen rollito hubiera solucionado el lio, y él sigue haciendose el chulo, pues que lo den!

ps: GUAPA!



--
Seen in contramowly home page (?)

Link quitado! ;)

what i know now: someone (henri) used the idea of the stencil (not copyrighted if it's on the wall with no credits) not your picture. i might be wrong of course, but the question is: if there is stencil somewhere and it's not signed, should i not take picture of it because it's copyrighted? and whatr is definition of street art then? if henri had seen your pic first, he should give credits. what i know about stealing is that people very often are shouting and then using others work without permission.
i honestly am inspired very often by others work. and always try to give credits. but honestly, i wouldn't post someone else picture in my stream as mine. i wouldn't change it into poster either...
you can have example here:
www.flickr.com/photos/contramowly/1136022339
someone used my picture, i even deleted my account on flickr but that person is STILL using my work, even if with credits...
--
Seen in a user's home page (?)

So mad.melon, this was exactly what happened, the use of the pic without giving credit.

I had to, as... erm... 7(sorry) says fight for a little something in Henry´s work sauing what the source was.

But now all is sorted and I am going to take actions in my account and the privacy of my pics...

I am not here for popularity although it would seem so by what occured, but to learn and I have learnt a little bit with this story...

See next blog if interested...

Cheers mad.melon!

cheers! :) and nice to meet you!!
--
Seen in my account recent activity (?)

A post-process of a not-CC licensed shot breaks Ipernity Terms of Service (if not international copyright laws).
There is a sort of silent mutual agreement to admit it if the author links to the original and he accepts to delete it if requested. Asking before publishing is always the better choice.

NOTE: I'm not a fan of copyright, but I chose to copyright my shots because I love to see how they are used.

--
Seen in robertoballerini home page (?)

Thanks Roberto!

So I was actually not that wrong... I felt morally I had right over the pic. I copyright all my pics but was unsure how I would be covered and you just offered the answer...

Now I have just proceeded to a major change of privacy in all but one pic of my stream...

Street art is..ok! but the shot is yours, it represents the way you see it, feel it, assume it and nobody can modify these feelings without asking you or proposing you the result...
I am right if i go to the same place to take a shot of the same piece of street art, i am right if i publish this shot on Iper or someplace else, but it is sure that my shot will not be the same of yours except if i am not honnest... so in this case no need asking permission.
Your gallery is very interesting and beautiful.. ;-)

Thanks KelticLago!

Since Henri closed his blog related to street art and its legality and I find the subject interesting, I think I might actually start a discussion on the subject...

Keep your eyes peeled!

And thanks for your comment about my gallery too! It is just a small and humble gallery and it surprises me that it has generated a controversy, actually.

Everything was so very quiet here!!

So quiet that I think maybe and before the dust settle in, I need to upload more and more pics!

Cos I have tons waiting to be displayed! ^_^

Hello *~Amimar~*
I will readily admit I do not know much or very little or even understand the legalities of such things
perhaps I should acquaint myself with more information before commenting
as I do NOT want to offend you NOR Henri.
Henri had already locked his blog about this in which he had tagged me
so I was unable to comment there
so....
I will say this my lil 2 cents worth
I do not know you...
but from what I am gathering about this incident
you had every right to *expect* Henri to acknowledge in some way
whether it be before hand...something like "hey I really like this image and I would like to do a series inspired by it" OR even if he went ahead as he did...I am feeling he should have linked your pic saying "inspired by..."
Now
having said all of this...
I DO know Henri...
I know he has a huge caring heart
I know he would never intentionally
do anything in a malicious way toward you or anyone
involving their pics or anything else
he is very passionate
and yes very stubborn (me too)
but he truly is a sweetie pie...I know this may be hard for
you to see given some of the exchanges between you
but he really is...

we all make mistakes
maybe this just simply falls under that category

you mentioned above somewhere that all is sorted
I hope so and I hope no hard feelings between the two
of you as well

have a good day
Sherry

Hi Sherry, thanks a lot for your visit and comment!

I am glad you and Henri get on very well and that you are good friends...!

Things did not go the right way for him and me to go in that direction, it seems although we never know with time.

I am already quite a reserved person in day to day life and choose very carefully my Friends. I must be lucky as hell or choose in the right places because I have a wonderful bunch of Friends mostly around Europe. You know, real Friends, those that are there for the good or bad and for whom you do anything...

I am happy with the amounts of Friends I have at the moment and Friendship is only proven through facts too.

As for the incident with Henri... Hard feelings? Well, it has opened for me the box of questions and made me think about a few matters. That is good. Reflection is!

Have a great day too, dear!

I clicked my way from this post to your photo to Henri to his post and now I'm back. What a long way ;-)

And what's my conclusion: I don't know, if there is any wrong or right about the subject. But what I really like about the discussion is, that you - and Henri - are talking about it, talked to each other, talked with different people. So there's a chance to understand the different positions. I think everyone has good and bad days, makes errors, ... important is, to find a solution not by law and order but by talks.
I know, there are a lot of difficult topics ahead to talk about on such a website: Just think about ideas, composition, special kinds of post-processing, layers, brands, ... - who knows, if anyone will claims his rights about such things. Sharing photos, getting inspired, trying to learn and discuss the results, ... would be impossible.

OK, I stop talking here ;-)

I totally agree

Marcel!!! ^_^

I saw you coming and going! Well done and hope you did not get too "Internet sick"!! ^_^

You should carry on talking, you know!!!

We all got to learn from different points of view, here!

I certainly talked although I could from the very first moment have clicked on the link appearing on each of the photos that reads:

You consider this doc as offensive or illegal?

Then you see there are several options coming up and you can actually report the pics to a moderator and also leave a message.

It seems they actually read the messages they receive and probably communicate to the "infractor", dear...

Nice door! ^_^

Thank you for your visit - I saw you coming, wondering and going and coming back, too. ;-)
Yes, most times I'm not hidden in the shadow, I come and go through the front door - at least for friends around here. Sometimes when I visit strangers, I'm invisible ;-)

And I ain't got internet sick - or maybe I was before, cause I'm kind of internet addicted. But that's another story ...

Maybe it needs a moderator sometimes, but I think, talking is the best way to deal with everything what happens. My photos were also used by others and the "users" all communicated in different ways: one asked me before and then published the result at ipernity, one asked before and sent me a private copy, one showed me the result in a comment (maybe that's close to your "case"), one just said "I will use this" (I took a picture of something he painted at a wall, so maybe that's okay), one architect bought a photo (or let's say a right to publish - something like that) that I took - as a tourist - of her work (she was responsible for renewing a museum's facade) - that was a kind of strange experience for me - and maybe there are others that never said anything.

And what do I do? I enjoy the photos others did and try to get better. I think the ipernity-meeting in Barcelona will be hard for me. When I come back and see all the beautiful photos made by the others, I will be depressed and won't show mine. But that's off topic ... ;-)

I’m not 100% sure of the legalities of this … but on moral grounds you are correct, permission should have been asked for and the picture should be linked back to you.

That is what I claimed all along.

And it is actually possible to claim that here in Ipernity...!

Good to see you around, 6 of 1!

I think you have been Richard Princed

Prince was the first photographer to make a million bucks from taking a photo of a photo of the marlbro man.

Sam Abell who took the original photo didn't get a cent. But that is art for you. where a copy of the original is worth more than the original.

Thanks a lot for that piece of info!

I know it does happen a lot in life but if there is a way to sort it out and fight for what you think it is right, then...

:)

I have now read that extremely interesting link that you posted.

There is a difference here... I took a documental picture without any further modification except for the levels of a graffiti as it was. Then Henri took the graffiti and put it on different wall texture which we are not sure he actually pictured or created yet, by the way. So basically, he took something that was on a wall and... put it in another wall... @_@

He also said Graffitis are illegal but his intention was different from Prince´s since he claimed he just did it for fun in a post he has now deleted maybe because he is repented of what he said for whatever reason. Richard Prince seems to be a clever dude who is actually pointing attention over commercial legality however moral lacking facts.

Maybe if the intention and message of Henri would have been in concordance with his view that Graffitis are illegal then I would have found it interesting but I would have still asked for the link to my picture.

In the same way that Prince seem to be doing because it looks like it is deffinately his intention to relate his work with the original to bring attention to his message...

I feel very tired after all this writing! ^_^

reading ;) all the time!
--
Seen in my account recent activity (?)

It appears that if you get an idea then why not run with it... is nothing sacred:-)



--
Seen in my account recent activity (?)