When you buy a coin online, is it ok to reuse its (nice) photo for resale later?

SYRACUSIAN

Trueview excluded, it's pretty obvious that if you buy a PCGS coin that has been TrueViewed you own its photo too, there's a reason why it can be retrieved from PCGS' site with the cert number.



But what about the rest? What do you think?

theboz11

If the photo is really good, I ask the seller if I can have it. Haven't had one turn me down yet.

SYRACUSIAN

Even if the seller is a total unknown? And why do you think you have to ask? Wasn't the picture the prime factor that made you win the coin in the first place?



Not taking sides, I just want to see what members think, I'm a bit confused on the subject.

JamminJ

Using the photos without permission is theft, pure and simple.

SYRACUSIAN

Could you please be more specific James?


And if so, why don't you put a logo in your great pictures,so that they cannot be reused?

BS

It seems if you buy the coin you should be able to you the photo.

JamminJ

<< <i>Could you please be more specific James? >>



Whoever takes the photo owns the copyright on that photo (it is a spearate entity for the coin). I don't put a logo or make a fuss because I grant blanket permission to use my photos to anyone who buys from me.

Some people get offended but I think of it as an annoyance not worth getting bothered over. When feeling mischevious I'll occasionally ask sellers with my photos for larger size pictures or details on how they take them. Obviously, I use alt IDs for this.

satootoko

<< <i>Whoever takes the photo owns the copyright on that photo (it is a spearate entity for the coin). >>

Just to clarify a widely misunderstood aspect of copyright law, in its simpleist form, when someone creates and publishes a copyrightable work, they own a copyright in "the manner of expression".

Although copyright registration is required under US federal law as a pre-condition to suing for infringement, if you can prove that you were the actual originator, and the time period during which a copyright is valid hasn't expired, you can register Monday morning, and sue Monday afternoon for an infringement occurring before registration was applied for..

BTW in copright law "publishing" means simply allowing anyone else to see (or hear) your work product.

coinkat

good question that does not have a simple answer...

Stork

IMO the photo is a seperate thing altogether and if I wanted the photo I would ask.

After all, it requires skill, equipment and time to generate a fabulous photo. When you start talking about professional quality photos, then it's a product.

Of course I'm sure many of us have a few snaps downloaded, but intent counts too. It's one thing to have a photo in your album, it's another when you start using it to sell something or put in a book or whatever. Then money gets involved and, in my opinion, the guy who did all the work to take the photo deserves credit, if not a cut.

Again, just my opinion. Of course if anyone is so enamoured of my coin photos taken so far, feel free to keep a copy .

SYRACUSIAN

Although copyright registration is required under US federal law as a pre-condition to suing for infringement, if you can prove that you were the actual originator, and the time period during which a copyright is valid hasn't expired, you can register Monday morning, and sue Monday afternoon for an infringement occurring before registration was applied for..



So, if I take one of JJ's photos, photoshop the font and perhaps a few other details, it's not certain that he'll be able to sue me.


I understand the moral aspect, especially among members, but legally, I'm more inclined to accept BS' opinion. I have occasionally used some members' photos for resale without prior authorization or credit and I apologize for that, it won't happen again. But for us, image challenged guys, to use a photo that was the reason to raise the price of the said coin to begin with, is often from tempting to unavoidable. I submit 99% of my raw coins to PCGS almost exlusively for its TrueView service, NGC has to follow sooner or later.Until then, I have oworked with a few very skilled photographers of this forum,I have sent them my coins prior to sale for a fee and I continue to do this as we speak, it helps create a bond beteeen us too, sometimes 3-4 members can be involved in a single consignement, from initial seller to end buyer. But sometimes, the photo is right there, Teletrade, Goldbergs, Heritage etc, and photoshopping and reusing them is common practice. I have difficulty to see them as different entities even if I pay for separate image fees most of the times, unless it concerns pricey coins that I'm not confortable sending back and fourth to the US.

satootoko

<< <i>So, if I take one of JJ's photos, photoshop the font and perhaps a few other details, it's not certain that he'll be able to sue me. >>

Now your talking about "derivative works" Dimitri, and that is one of the most esoteric areas of intellectual property law.

Very simplistic answer -

- Change the font used for the title, and make no other changes - you are infringing.- Fiddle with the picture until there is no way for anyone to recognize it as the one you started with, and you are home free.- Between those extremes - hire a good IP lawyer!

BTW - He can always sue you if he can afford the Court's filing fee. The real question is whether he can win

MacCrimmon

<< <i>

<< <i>So, if I take one of JJ's photos, photoshop the font and perhaps a few other details, it's not certain that he'll be able to sue me. >>

Now your talking about "derivative works" Dimitri, and that is one of the most esoteric areas of intellectual property law.

Very simplistic answer -

- Change the font used for the title, and make no other changes - you are infringing.- Fiddle with the picture until there is no way for anyone to recognize it as the one you started with, and you are home free.- Between those extremes - hire a good IP lawyer!

BTW - He can always sue you if he can afford the Court's filing fee. The real question is whether he can win >>




I would think it best to at least ask permission in advance. Given that most images are not taken by individuals who earn their daily bread from such an activity, it would most likely not be a problem for you to re-use their original image to sell at a later date on eBay or elsewhere.

If however, one intended to use the image for another purpose, such as the creation of a poster for the express purpose of selling, or say, insertion into a "coffee table" book on Great Coinage of Europe, or somesuch, then one should obtain explicit permission in writing as well as entering into a potential royalty contract with the originator of the image(s) for such use.

OTOH, in an instance where one might be using one of dcarr's images to sell or resell one of his medals, or original works via the internet or any other print venue, you had better obtain explicit permission first to use his images given that he is definitely (1) a professional, and (2) he derives all or a portion of his income from his engraving, and the images used to sell those medals.

Cheers.

JamminJ

<< <i>So, if I take one of JJ's photos, photoshop the font and perhaps a few other details, it's not certain that he'll be able to sue me. >>



I'll just win it and neg you.

Cruzi

When using a photo that is not taken by me, I always ask first and give credit to them when using it.

Don't know exactly what the legalities are but feel that is simply the right thing to do.

AuldFartte

<< <i>When using a photo that is not taken by me, I always ask first and give credit to them when using it.

Don't know exactly what the legalities are but feel that is simply the right thing to do. >>



The photographer, regardless of his or her degree of ability (professional or amateur) owns the Copyright the instant the shutter is snapped. The image is protected under the laws concerning Copyright practically worldwide, so I think asking permission is only proper. I'd probably give permission freely to a buyer of one of my coins.

ajaan

Although the image legally belongs to the imager, his company, or the person who paid for the image, I think once you buy a coin the imager should allow you to use the image without permission. Getting permission is nice though.

If anyone wins one of my auctions, or purchases a coin from me, I give global permission to use my image to resell the coin.

coinpictures

In my humble opinion, this is one of those areas where it's much ado about nothing... like driving 67 in a 65 mph zone technically is speeding and breaking the law, it's hardly worth prosecuting for. There's also a lot of gray area.

Technically, yes the photographer owns the right to the photgraph, but frankly any photographer who would refuse the current owner of the coin the right to use it for reselling the coin is an egotistical jackass and should be publicly outed as such. Of course this assumes that the photographs were taken by the owner of his own coins, as opposed to pictures taken for someone else for hire, in which case the owner of the coins owns the rights to the picture, not the photographer.

I don't want to hear about 'slippery slope' and sob stories about someone losing their livelihood, yadda, yadda, yadda... we're talking about photographs of a coin being used to resell that coin at a later date. That's it. Not extending the argument to using someone else's photographs for other purposes.

From a logical (not legal) perspective, couldn't a subsequent owner of the coin be just as pissed off if a photographer continued to display pictures of the coin, considering they no longer own it? From an emotional standpoint, it cuts both ways.

All that being said, I think it's simple courtesy to ask permission to use the pictures in question. If denied, then out the bassturd.

At the end of the day, I don't know that it's going to be filed as crime of the century either way.

Note: I say all this seeing both sides of the equation. In my coin gallery I have pictures of coins I no longer own. I also have taken pictures of coins for other forum members on a paying basis.

koincollect

This is an interesting question. I agree with people who say that the owner's permission should be taken. In most of the cases the owner of the picture does not mind giving permission. Even if the seller is a complete unknown he might not mind. There might be an exception here in cases where the photographer thinks his skill is unique-- like in case of micro-photography where he might not want to give permission!

Conder101

<< <i>Trueview excluded, it's pretty obvious that if you buy a PCGS coin that has been TrueViewed you own its photo too, there's a reason why it can be retrieved from PCGS' site with the cert number >>


Are you sure about that? I think you may find that PCGS owns the rights to the Trueview image and the person who paid for the image probably has rights to the use of the image. Yes, you can retrieve the image from the site if you have the cert number but that does NOT give you the right to use the image. And the fact that PCGS keeps the image in their system is probably a pretty good indication that THEY do own the rights to it.



<< <i>Although the image legally belongs to the imager, his company, or the person who paid for the image, >>


The image, believe it or not, does NOT belong to the person who paid for the imge unless the photographer grants the rights.




<< <i>From a logical (not legal) perspective, couldn't a subsequent owner of the coin be just as pissed off if a photographer continued to display pictures of the coin, considering they no longer own it? From an emotional standpoint, it cuts both ways. >>


Well he could, but he shouldn't. The owner of the coin has and controls the coin and he can always have another image made, but the photographer owns and controls the image he made, but has no control over the coin and can't make any other images of it without the owners permission.

291fifth

You are only buying the coin, not the photo or photo rights. You have to be careful here. If the photographer was a professional you could find yourself hit with a significant charge or even a lawsuit. Always ask permission. If you don't have permission, don't use the photo.

coinmickey

understand the moral aspect, especially among members, but legally, I'm more inclined to accept BS' opinion.

This would be a bad idea. Speaking as a copyright lawyer, what others have said about ownership of the coin versus the photo is pretty much accurate. The photographer owns the image.

Also, the point Conder raised about who owns those PCGS TrueView photos is also something that should be researched before you reuse them. I'm going to bet that PCGS owns them.

FYI- in general photographers are a most litigious group and they make a point of keeping an eye on where their work is used. I know we are in a different realm here with coins but the principle is the same. When in doubt- GET PERMISSION!

TwoKopeiki

I ran into this question when I purchased a coin from BS. He provided me with an auction listing from CNG, but I was hesitant to download and use the picture. I sent them an e-mail with the request and received the following reply :



<< <i>
Dear Mr. Martyn,
Yes, of course you can down load the photo of your winning lot.
Best regards,
Dale Tatro
CNG
>>



I agree with coinmickey - it's better to ask.

Oh, and here is the beauty



Thanks again, Brett! I love this coin!

SYRACUSIAN

Of course it's better to ask, we're just discussing what happens hypothetically if we don't ask.


<< Trueview excluded, it's pretty obvious that if you buy a PCGS coin that has been TrueViewed you own its photo too, there's a reason why it can be retrieved from PCGS' site with the cert number >>


Are you sure about that? I think you may find that PCGS owns the rights to the Trueview image and the person who paid for the image probably has rights to the use of the image. Yes, you can retrieve the image from the site if you have the cert number but that does NOT give you the right to use the image. And the fact that PCGS keeps the image in their system is probably a pretty good indication that THEY do own the rights to it.



I'm certainly not sure about it, but if a coin has been TrueViewed by someone, this submitter paid for the image fees as he did with the slabbing fees. The slab changes hands ,why would the picture not do the same? After all, TrueView is supposed to be a very accurate image of the coin, PCGS approved, so it's in PCGS' better interest that these images are used and reused when the coin is sold, instead of pictures taken by people who would exaggerate some features and colours or make some defects disappear....

ccrdragon

I see your point on this Dmitri, but let me give you another example that goes along with the TrueView example:

My wedding photographer (and all of the other photographers that I talked to) sold me the pictures that he took at the wedding, but I signed a very specific form that stated the he (the photographer) retained all rights to the negatives and to publish any of the pictures that he had taken at the wedding - in other words, I owned the pictures that he delivered (the actual printed copies made form the negatives), but he still retained all rights to further use of the negatives for any purpose what-so-ever!

I would think that the TrueView pictures come under this same sort of contract - permission to use and display, but not to publish (for money), transfer or sell.

SYRACUSIAN

I would think that the TrueView pictures come under this same sort of contract - permission to use and display, but not to publish (for money), transfer or sell.



You know Cecil, it already took me a while to swallow that I have to ask JJ permission to use his photos, now you're telling me that I have to get permission from Ron Guth too? If he comes to coinex, I'll have a chat about this with him.