This WOULD be a violation of copyright correct?

[Cyril Ma]

Link here:

http://flickr.com/photos/coldtrackdays/3203252200/

Not my picture, not my flickr (altho I did leave a comment on that picture)

Somewhat pisses me off seeing a fellow photographer would resort to this to drive up traffic to his "racing blog":rolleyes:

[Curtis Creager]

Funny and then not so funny. Kinda bad when you take credit for something you didn't do.

[Keith Schoeler]

I know nothing of the terms of use on that image, but coldtrackdays is decently known. http://www.coldtrackdays.com/

How did they take credit for it? They're not trying to pass the image off as their own.

Would you react the same if someone posted a pic of an '09 Ford sedan on their blog?

[Mike Ditz]

I know nothing of the terms of use on that image, but coldtrackdays is decently known. http://www.coldtrackdays.com/

How did they take credit for it? They're not trying to pass the image off as their own.

Would you react the same if someone posted a pic of an '09 Ford sedan on their blog?


It depends. Most PR pictures are licensed to the company (unless taken by staff photographers) for use in press kits to be used by legitimate news outlets. I don't know who decides if a website or blog is a legitimate news source. coldtrackdays.com may be, jmmylikescars.com may not be. There is very little policing of this by the manufacturers as many blogs are usually reprinting stuff they picked up from other blogs and sites anyway.
There are alot of website/blogs where they will add their logo or © to a shot they lifted from a presskit.

Not cool even if it is a shot of a 09 Ford Sedan.

[John Thawley]

It depends. Most PR pictures are licensed to the company (unless taken by staff photographers) for use in press kits to be used by legitimate news outlets. I don't know who decides if a website or blog is a legitimate news source. coldtrackdays.com may be, jmmylikescars.com may not be. There is very little policing of this by the manufacturers as many blogs are usually reprinting stuff they picked up from other blogs and sites anyway.
There are alot of website/blogs where they will add their logo or © to a shot they lifted from a presskit.

Not cool even if it is a shot of a 09 Ford Sedan.

I'm somewhat of the same mind... it's a bit cheezy. We run source-supplied photos on Trackbytes to accompany press releases etc., when it's a car I haven't had the opportunity to shoot. All photos on the site carry a "photo by...." tag line. If they're mine, it's my tagline... if they're someone else's, it carries their tagline. If it's not credtited.. we don't credit it.

JT

[Curtis Creager]

It's all a little misleading. I'm all for blog sites etc. some people will see these images and think that somehow they where their for the launch event in England. If you read the comments left on some of the images you'll see what I mean.

I found what I think is the source info for the side profile picture of the new MP4-24 this is the same image that's on their flickr site, it reads...."Sutton Images. No reproduction without permission. " href="/photos/597x478/manual/dgb0916jan42.jpg" title="McLaren Mercedes MP4-24 sidepod detail McLaren Mercedes MP4-24 Launch, McLaren Technology Centre, Woking, England, 16 January 2009"

So maybe they registered with Sutton Images and have paid for the rights to use the images.