neowin.net — One of Neowin's forum members has discovered that Kotaku, a popular gamers? news site, is taking pictures from his blog, cropping them, and posting them as part of their gaming stories. Not only did Kotaku not ask Prince17 for permission to take his pictures, they did not credit his work whatsoever.
Dec 12, 2007 View in Crawl 4
ukfooleDec 13, 2007
Copyright in your country is valid whether it was created for profit or not.Actually, Kotaku does owe this guy for use of his material.
peppermintpigDec 13, 2007
Not a fan of intellectual property, but attribution is the right thing in this case.
ayeroxorDec 13, 2007
I bet comma splices still make you look like a noob even in India.
jagoxDec 13, 2007
...except the bloggers that run Kotaku ARE NOT journalists nor do they have the maturity or professionalism to be one.
billblaskeyDec 14, 2007
i think kotaku is a pretty cool guy. eh steals other bloggers pictures and doesn't afraid of anything.
hipnerdDec 14, 2007
It's called "reasonable expectation of privacy." If you were having sex in front of a picture window facing the street, you can;t sue the neighbor for taking a few pics. But if you were in your bedroom at the back of the house and he took naked pictures of you with a massive zoom lens bouncing off the bathroom mirror, he's invading your privacy.And as a magazine editor, I'll reiterate what hammerpants said earlier: you can take pictures of people in public places without any type of waiver or release forms. The entire field of photojournalism is built on that concept.
hipnerdDec 14, 2007
All work is automatically copyrighted from the moment of creation, whether a copyright notice appears on it or not.
booksDec 15, 2007
Nah, f**k OJ.
jeremyduffyDec 20, 2007
Well said loopychew. I conceed.