Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

is it LEGAL to use other peoples' selfies floating around the internet,on my website?

Options
  • 27-01-2014 11:51am
    #1
    GhanGee
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭


    Dear all,

    is it LEGAL to use other peoples' selfie-photographs floating around the internet, on my website? Also, is it legal to use all sorts of "funny" pictures and other image material if it's not copyrighted / watermarked ?

    Thanks,

    GG


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Bepolite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,737 ✭✭✭Bepolite


    It's not LEGAL to give LEGAL advice in this forum. What's LEGAL in Ireland may not be LEGAL in other jurisdictions, such as there the selfie came from or where the website is hosted.


  • Options
    #3
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    If it's not your photo, then you need the permission of the copyright holder. No watermark or anything else is required to make the image copyright.

    Copyright is automatic, once the image is taken.


  • Options
    #4
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Despite the legalities, whatever they may be, think how you would feel if someone snagged your selfie for their own purposes without your permission.

    Your website sounds like a terrible idea.


  • Options
    #5
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    Paulw wrote: »
    If it's not your photo, then you need the permission of the copyright holder. No watermark or anything else is required to make the image copyright.

    Copyright is automatic, once the image is taken.

    In Ireland. But on the internet it could be different...


  • Options
    #6
    TonyCochrane
    Registered Users Posts: 21 ✭TonyCochrane


    GhanGee wrote: »
    Dear all,

    is it LEGAL to use other peoples' selfie-photographs floating around the internet, on my website? Also, is it legal to use all sorts of "funny" pictures and other image material if it's not copyrighted / watermarked ?

    Thanks,

    GG

    See if you can find a few licensed under creative commons although it may also depend on what you are using the photo for.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    234
    Registered Users Posts: 1,529 ✭✭✭234


    Paulw wrote: »
    If it's not your photo, then you need the permission of the copyright holder. No watermark or anything else is required to make the image copyright.

    Copyright is automatic, once the image is taken.

    As NoQuarter has said, this would depend on which jurisdiction's laws governed the website. For instance, in the US there is a need to assert copyright in the form of (c).


  • Options
    #8
    saltyjack silverblade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 480 ✭✭saltyjack silverblade


    234 wrote: »
    As NoQuarter has said, this would depend on which jurisdiction's laws governed the website. For instance, in the US there is a need to assert copyright in the form of (c).

    Not since the US adhered to the Berne Convention. It was like this before 1989 but copyright is automatic now.


  • Options
    #9
    234
    Registered Users Posts: 1,529 ✭✭✭234


    saltyjack silverblade wrote: »
    Not since the US adhered to the Berne Convention. It was like this before 1989 but copyright is automatic now.

    Ooops, my mistake.


  • Options
    #10
    billy few mates
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭billy few mates


    What about those 'Selfies' that people put out there for all to see, can they be used...?

    F467C2A9-E452-4FDE-93FB-019B223B14E9_zpshr9jhsv9.jpg


  • Options
    #11
    saltyjack silverblade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 480 ✭✭saltyjack silverblade


    It's difficult to know whether or not a selfie could be considered a non-copyrighted work. I would say it is non-copyrighted and free to use once in the public domain.

    You need to look at the originality of the work. Throughout Europe the model is different and there is huge academic debate as to what is meant by the term 'originality'. At the moment it is only defined in a few areas of copyright law like databases and computer programs. The test for originality is usually applied as the author's own intellectual creation. If this is applied in the Irish courts I don't see a selfie being passed as a protected work.
    Ireland has always applied a lower standard of test which makes it easier to have a work copyright protected. But through ECJ decisions it would seem the Irish model is now outdated.
    I would say the work is not copyright protected as it lacks originality.

    As to whether it is legal, I would say yes as long as they are not minors. Non-copyrighted image in the public domain.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    saltyjack silverblade wrote: »
    I would say the work is not copyright protected as it lacks originality.

    As to whether it is legal, I would say yes as long as they are not minors. Non-copyrighted image in the public domain.

    What would a minor have to do with it? Copyright does not differentiate between a minor and an adult subject in a photo.

    Also, how would you prove that the image was not copyrighted?

    As for your view that the work lacks originality, well, that is only your opinion, which may not be the opinion of a judge and hence would get a ruling against the OP in court.

    It is always better to err on the side of caution, and not use such an image.


  • Options
    #13
    saltyjack silverblade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 480 ✭✭saltyjack silverblade


    I know that copyright law has nothing to do with minors. I would stay away from posting pictures of minors regardless of the situation on the internet.

    Why do you think the work is protected by copyright? How does the image meet the standard of originality?


  • Options
    #14
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    saltyjack silverblade wrote: »
    Why do you think the work is protected by copyright? How does the image meet the standard of originality?

    The guy trying to look like Jesus and even the pose - not original.

    But, the image, taken of him standing beside the painting - original. You could go in to things like composition of image, details of background, etc. To me, it's original enough to quality.

    Either way, your view and my view don't matter. It's the view of the judge on the day that matters.


  • Options
    #15
    saltyjack silverblade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 480 ✭✭saltyjack silverblade


    I was speaking of selfies in more general terms and not that specific picture above. The picture above I can see copyright protection, bog standard selfie, I cannot see protection.


  • Options
    #16
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    saltyjack silverblade wrote: »
    I was speaking of selfies in more general terms and not that specific picture above. The picture above I can see copyright protection, bog standard selfie, I cannot see protection.

    Why? Is the person in the selfie not unique enough in itself? If a person takes 20 selfies in 20 different locations, then they are each unique in their own way, surely?

    What, in your opinion, is required to make an image unique?


  • Options
    #17
    saltyjack silverblade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 480 ✭✭saltyjack silverblade


    The picture above is a juxtaposition and shows creativity involved in the picture.
    The standard selfie does not do this. I think it falls short of the EU criteria for original work. There are no creative choices being made in the pictures.


  • Options
    #18
    Zillah
    Registered Users Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    There is a huge difference between what is legally protected under someone else's copyright and what you will 99.999% get away with. The vast majority of funny macros that you see online are using someone else's photo without permission. In theory the original photographer could be sending cease and desist letters to imgur and similar websites, but in reality almost no one ever tries to assert their copyright in that sort of situation.

    So you have no right to be using other people's selfies on your website and you would almost certainly get away with it.

    I completely disagree with saltyjack's view of originality. He seems to be going with an artistic judgement of it being original (walking out of a movie: "It wasn't very original was it? It turned out his friend was the bad guy all along? Pff, seen that before"), as opposed to a more technical - legal - judgement on whether it exists as a new and independent work and therefore a creation of the author rather than simply an iteration of something that already exists.

    There's no reason a selfie would not be automatically copyrighted to the photographer.
    saltyjack silverblade wrote: »
    There are no creative choices being made in the pictures.

    Really??

    - Camera position.
    - Background choice.
    - Clothing decision.
    - Hairstyling.
    - Makeup.
    - Lighting intensity.
    - Lighting colour cast.
    - Photo crop.
    - Filters applied.

    Just off the top of my head. You might not respect it as a work of art but that doesn't mean they lack sufficient originality to warrant copyright.


  • Options
    #19
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    Zillah wrote: »
    - Camera position.
    - Background choice.
    - Clothing decision.
    - Hairstyling.
    - Makeup.
    - Lighting intensity.
    - Lighting colour cast.
    - Photo crop.
    - Filters applied.
    98 out of 100 selfies have had no consideration taken of any of the above.

    The real question is can a duckface be copyrighted.


  • Options
    #20
    Valentine1
    Registered Users Posts: 434 ✭✭Valentine1


    saltyjack silverblade wrote: »
    It's difficult to know whether or not a selfie could be considered a non-copyrighted work. I would say it is non-copyrighted and free to use once in the public domain.

    You need to look at the originality of the work. Throughout Europe the model is different and there is huge academic debate as to what is meant by the term 'originality'. At the moment it is only defined in a few areas of copyright law like databases and computer programs. The test for originality is usually applied as the author's own intellectual creation. If this is applied in the Irish courts I don't see a selfie being passed as a protected work.
    Ireland has always applied a lower standard of test which makes it easier to have a work copyright protected. But through ECJ decisions it would seem the Irish model is now outdated.
    I would say the work is not copyright protected as it lacks originality.

    As to whether it is legal, I would say yes as long as they are not minors. Non-copyrighted image in the public domain.

    This post is total baloney and is the reason why Legal advice is not allowed on this site. If you have genuine concerns about what you can use on a website you should see a qualified solicitor and seek professional advice.

    The Copyright and related rights act 2000 is the relevant law here.

    A person taking a photograph of themself, aka a Selfie owns the copyright of that photo, ie the Selfie. Originality is not an issue, being the photographer of that particular is the question. Furthermore simply because a photo is used without attribution in other places does not mean that it is in the public domain.

    My opinion would be that as a rule of thumb, before using any photo, on your website ask yourself "do I own the copyright for this image?" if the answer is no, then you cannot use it legally without permission of the person who took the photo.


Advertisement