stevez wrote:

Cathy2 wrote:I am a believer in attribution. I know there are many people here who feel slighted when their image or idea is used without attribution.

There is a big difference between stealing a copyrighted image and posting it without permission or even attribution and modifying the cooking instructions of a copyrighted recipe and posting it (with or without attribution). One is against the law and the other isn't.

Steve,

I have gotten testy e-mails from people complaining about other people using their images from this very website. I also spent a very trying day last year obtaining permission to use people's images for the WTTW Chicago Tonight show.

Thank you for the clarification other people may have needed on this subject.

Regards,

Cathy2 wrote:I know there are many people here who feel slighted when their image or idea is used without attribution.

Cathy2 wrote:I have gotten testy e-mails from people complaining about other people using their images from this very website. I also spent a very trying day last year obtaining permission to use people's images for the WTTW Chicago Tonight show.

Thank you for the clarification other people may have needed on this subject.

Regards,

Cathy,

I know you know the difference, but the point is that in the case of an image, it's not a mere slight. It's a crime.

Pirates in the Kitchen: Recipe copying rampant online
In this October '07 article, Cnet discusses recipe copyright - and interviews America's Test Kitchen, which states that they're not patrolling the web, though they do say they ask for removal of their recipes from other sites. They also discuss a content tracking software called "Attributor" which did a study checking for "significantly similar" recipes, which I found very interesting.

stevez wrote:Cathy,

I know you know the difference, but the point is that in the case of an image, it's not a mere slight. It's a crime.

Steve,

What are the copyright issues when a photo is copied, then altered?

Regards,

Cathy2 wrote:

stevez wrote:Cathy,

I know you know the difference, but the point is that in the case of an image, it's not a mere slight. It's a crime.

Steve,

What are the copyright issues when a photo is copied, then altered?

Regards,

The original copyright holder retains all rights regardless of how the photo may be altered. Unlike a recipe, where lists of ingredients can't be copyrighted, photos are copyrighted works of art and can't be used without the permission of the copyright holder. That's not to say that this doesn't happen all the time, but if the copyright holder wanted to make an issue of this use, they'd have an iron clad case.

stevez wrote:[T]he point is that in the case of an image, it's not a mere slight. It's a crime.

[. . .]

The original copyright holder retains all rights regardless of how the photo may be altered. Unlike a recipe, where lists of ingredients can't be copyrighted, photos are copyrighted works of art and can't be used without the permission of the copyright holder. That's not to say that this doesn't happen all the time, but if the copyright holder wanted to make an issue of this use, they'd have an iron clad case.

Not to get too pedantic/semantic, but use of a copyrighted image is not always a crime, as there are certain conditions that must be met for the criminal provisions of the U.S. copyright code to be applicable. Many unauthorized uses of images will be against the law in terms of creating civil liability, but will not necessarily meet the criteria for criminal liability. Also, copyrighted works can be used without the permission of the owner in the case of "fair use" that meets certain criteria (although these are more amorphous than the conditions for criminal liability, as they are applied in more of a multi-factor balancing test), although much of what's done on the internet with others' photos (posting of others' photos in whole without permission) probably would not qualify as fair uses. Certain websites such as Flickr allow users to assign default permissions to their photos (e.g., anyone can use, so long as there is attribution and so long as it is for non-commercial purposes), which cuts down on the transaction costs of getting permissions from copyright holders.

Many (not all) copyright questions are addressed on this web site Rights and Reproductions Information Network. Although addressed to the museum professional, the sections on "Introduction to Copyright" and "Tricky Issues, Public Domain and Fair Use" are particularly relevant to this discussion of who can use images, how and when.

Disclaimer: I don't even portray a lawyer on TV but I do deal with this issue in my profession on occasion.

Code: Select all

Eat your art out… intellectual property protection for food

http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Regula ... =copyright

Who Has the Copyright Over My Cheese?
The European Union’s highest court decided the taste of a cheese does not qualify for protection.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/13/busi ... right.html