Den 13. jul. 2006 kl. 20.31 skrev mike wilson:
> DagT wrote:
>
>> Den 13. jul. 2006 kl. 18.16 skrev Charles Robinson:
>>
>>
>>> On Jul 13, 2006, at 11:08, DagT wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Just to keep your minds off politics .-)
>>>>
>>>
>>>> After some detective work, and help from the Norwegian community at
>>>> www.foto.no, I found the painter, and he admitted that he had
>>>> downloaded my picture and used it, but he refused to take the
>>>> picture
>>>> down and claimed that he was a not a very good painter and
>>>> therefore
>>>> his painting was not a copy of my picture. He said that he would
>>>> sell it if someone wanted it and that I could by it if I wanted to.
>>>>
>>>
>>> My opinion: If the artist is holding onto the painting for himself
>>> ("personal use"???), then "no harm, no foul". But if he is
>>> intending
>>> to SELL it, you are entitled to a large share, if not ALL of the
>>> money - since it is really your image.
>>
>>
>> That was my first reaction too, and I said that if it was sold the
>> price should be given to the kids. The Copyright issue is one thing,
>> he is selling a painting showing people who may be recognized, and
>> without asking them.
>>
>> Now I´ve just decided that the picture is to be destroyed. Otherwise
>> it may be resold some day.
>
> But the photograph has been posted on the internet. I don't think you
> have much chance with that argument.....
Yes I do. I usually get around 200 visitors to each picture, that is
less than I would have got in a popular gallery. There is, legally,
no different between making it available on the net or in a gallery.
According to Norwegian law (and Danish as well as probably Swedish
and german etc) I keep the right to control the use of my picture
even after it has been published.
The law gives me control over any sales of my picture and versions of
it in other techniques, like drawings and paintings.
DagT
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
