With so many pictures of model railroads available both in publications and online, I got the idea that some of them could be used to fill in gaps on a backdrop, particulary to blend in with background structures. One of the advantages of doing this is the backdrop structures would be roughly the same level of detail and realism as the 3-D structures. The only thing that bothers me about this approach is the ethics of using another modelers work without their permission. Personally, I would be flattered if someone felt pictures of my layout were worthy of being reproduced for someone else’s layout, but I’m not sure everyone would feel the same way. In some cases, the original creator could be easily contacted to get their permission but that would not always be the case. How do others feel about using pictures of other layouts without first getting permission from the owner?
Unless the material is copyrighted, I don’t think personal use is an issue. I suppose one could always contact the modeler in question through whatever website/magazine and ask for permission to use it.
It’s good of you to post such a question. I suppose the legal eagles might say that the public domain is for everybody to use. I would think, however, that it would be a matter of common coutesy to ask the modelers ahead of time.
Watch out everybody. Careful what you post. [;)]
I don’t think anyone would care if it was for personal use.
Let’s say you see a picture on the net that you like and you make it your “wall paper”(background desktop image) on your PCs monitor. Are you going to ask permission from the photographer if you can use it as wall paper - probaly not. It’s the same thing.
AS long you are not using someones material for profit, you should have no ‘Ethical’ problems; however,
Placing photos side-by-side will give you ‘perspective’ problems, if not a ‘checkerboard’ look.
I doubt if personal images on website would be useful for backgrounds when printed out. Most are of a reduced quality for faster uploading of web pages. They may look just fine on your computer screen but not the greatest when printed out at any large size.
I suppose if someone offered something for sale as a backdrop and you copied the picture and then used it as a backdrop, then you would be depriving him of rightful profits, sort of like copying a music CD without permission. That would be unethical. On the other hand, if you saw a picture in a magazine and cut it out to paste on the wall as a backdrop, or even if you scanned and re-sized it, I wouldn’t see anything wrong at all if you’ve paid for the magazine. The difference is that the “intellectual content owner” isn’t losing out. He’s not in the backdrop business, so I see nothing ethically wrong with doing that.
Usually the paranoid folks that think your out to get their photos will print “copywrited” or their name in big letters across the photo making it unusable. I don’t think they would have a leg to stand on in court if you DID profit from an un-copywritten photo. It’s pretty much public domain on the web at that point.
I have no problem with it myself. If someone wants to use pics from my layout on theirs, go for it.
Please Google “copyright” and “fair use” first. This is a can of worms that continually comes up in the hobby. I was rightly corrected on another forum for expanding “fair use” beyond what current law and court cases allow.
You do not have to apply for a copyright for your work to fall under copyright law anymore. Since 1989, an original work is not public domain unless the copyright owner says it is. Technically, you would own the copyrights to any original e-mail you posted. However, I’ll bet the terms of use for this forum probably specifically address this issue (now I’m going to have to look this up and check). Most forums and e-mail systems terms of use do not allow your retention of copyright for what you submit.
The AHRA of 1992 added some additional fair use provisions with respect to digital copying.
Most of the “fair use” provisions apply in the educational (face-to-face teaching and student research) world, and are not relevant here. However, the best treatise I have seen on “Fair Use” is at http://www.utsystem.edu/OGC/intellectualProperty/copypol2.htm.
Fair use generally (I’m getting on pretty thin ground here) allows you to copy (download) a non-commercial picture from a web site for personal use only. No sharing. No copying photos that are for (or might be intended for) sale. The gray area would be photos on commercial web sites that belong to a business - a business that has no practice or intent of selling the photos.&nb
By convention, personal use that is not going to benefit you or others financially should be okay.
But it is not quite that simple. If you were to decide that you’d like to submit a photo of your layout to MR, for example, and if you were to be published, there would most certainly be an issue in law since MR derives revenue. In that case, you would have to obtain permission.
<>As a writer, I think I should warn you to get permission. There are all kinds of ways that you could run afoul of the “fair use” clause without permission. It might well be that four of the five guys could care less. But the fifth could wind up owning your home.
Thanks for your post Fred. It saved me from having to write a lot of stuff…
Legally it may be a can of worms, but a small can.
Ethically, I would like to be asked, and it is so easy to ask.
I am using pics with the Huge pitures program and have found that downloaded pics do not blow up well at all. I have not been able to use one yet, though I keep looking.
When I down load from a commercial site, they always tell you the rules.
My opinion of this ethically, as opposed to legally, is that if the photo is not being offered for sale and you don’t sell it (or otherwise profit financially) then I see no wrong in downloading it for personal use. My feeling is that by posting it the owner has made it available to for your use for free. Unless he states otherwise on his website in which case I would honor his request (and not visit the site again either).
Legally, of course, no can seem to agree on anything. But then again we have lost sight of the original purpose for having copyrights and patents. “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries”
As usual just my [2c]
Enjoy
Paul
I was amazed at the cavalier attitude of Apple II users with regard to theft of software back in the day when Bill Gates was still writing TRS 80 operating systems. Wonder if they would want their hard work pirated by a fellow programer? The Chicago Seven warned us not to trust anyone over 30 until they passed their twenty ninth birthdays.
Grey areas of ethics for some and a point of honor for others. Some might offer their work for free as Jeffery did above, while Space Mouse was publicly chastised here for posting another individuals “Gator” picture in this forum without “permission”. If it is on the web doesnot mean it’s fair game, someone may have shed blood sweat and tears for “his product” and the very least we are obliged to do is ask their permission to use their work and give proper credit for it . If we are expecting to receive some profit for this “work” , I think that we have gone past the ethical question and into the legal area of who “owns that profit” or your house once the legal eagles get involved. While we all have our feelings about the Lionel/MTH issue, a court found that someone had “stolen” a design and that Lionel was responsible ultimately.
That being said, lets get back to modeling our own layouts and running trains!
Will
HEY, I’m onlt celebrating my 6th annual 29 m birthday in 3 months!!![bday][dinner][D)]
I left 29 behind 17 years ago. My mother has been “29” so long that she’s subtracting years.
ROTFLOL[(-D]