Comments on: Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release

By: Sammanfattning av HOF-skandalen | ScrappaNu

Sammanfattning av HOF-skandalen | ScrappaNu — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 07:54:50 +0000

[...] Nally har sammanfattat vad som hänt hittills. Hos Kelly Edgerton finns bildbevis på [...]

By: jon

jon — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 01:58:14 +0000

“If I am not mistaken, it doesn’t matter who the picture is of or who owns the camera. What matters is whose finger pushes down the button to take the picture. They are the ones who “own” the image”
you may be
IANAL, but there’s obviously a question of who owns someone’s likeness (for publication purposes) and who owns an image…if i try to take a picture of say eiffel tower and sell it in a gift shop, i’d be looking at a legal battle, because i do not own the image for that specific purpose.
this is to say–it’s up to CK to decide what they determine ownership, while keeping in mind copyright laws with respect to the purpose of the image.
on a personal note–i’m torn on whether or not i think it was well thought out, this rule about you being the photographer. in one sense i really think that scrapbooking is about how you use what you have to creatively tell a story, and *that’s* what the contest is about, not how skillful a photogrpaher you are. on the other hand, if they want to make a rule like that, it’s a decent enough challenge, although it makes obvious how so many of the layouts won’t be heartfelt (meaning to me that the artistic value is cheapened), because it was created solely for the purpose of winning a contest.
i can more sensibly see them having such a rule to make sure legal issues are avoided (i.e. taking a picture of a person on the street then using it then winning then being sued by the subject)
j.

By: Amanda

Amanda — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:47:54 +0000

Binxcat1
If I am not mistaken, it doesn’t matter who the picture is of or who owns the camera. What matters is whose finger pushes down the button to take the picture. They are the ones who “own” the image.

By: Steph

Steph — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 18:04:46 +0000

Thanks for the very well written summary of the situation (I have been traveling and got all caught up on the latest industry news in minutes thanks to you!).
I worked for many years in the high tech industry, beginning in PR. The number one lesson I learned from that job was this:
“Tell it all and tell it early.”
What I mean by this is that when you, as a company or individual, realize you have made a mistake, done something which violates rules/laws, or does something without integrity, the best plan of action is to explain the situation, to everyone, as quickly as possible…and be honest about it! Yes, PR pros are known to put a “spin” on things so they appear better or less damaging than they are, but they (the real pros) know enough to be the one “driving the public knowledge bus” rather than letting others drive the discussion and dissemination of facts and/or information.
This situation could have so easily been avoided, if:
1. The entrant had followed the rules
2. The contest host had enforced the rules
3. When the breaking of the rules was discovered, either the entrant admitted to the mistake and stepped down from the HOF title, or the contest host made an announcement to the affect that the rules were not followed and followed it by removing the HOF title from the offender. This applies whether or not the entrant “meant to” violate the rules and/or the contest host “knew” about the photography ownership/credit.
Having integrity is doing the right thing even when, or especially when, it’s not likely anyone else will ever know what you did. This industry could sue more integrity.
In the end, is this situation all that important in the big scope of things going on in the world? No, probably not. But, where do we draw the line on dishonesty?
Steph

By: Binxcat1

Binxcat1 — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:39:40 +0000

Thank you muchly for the informative article… it’s been the easiest to actually understand and seems to be fact based rather that the subjective and / or emotional comments that I have seen elsewhere. I think CK have done more damage with the perceived “coverup” but don’t you think this whole controversy is all just a bit overdone? (I mean we are talking scrapbooking not JFK here!!!).
Also, I have a purely hypothetical question, genuinely not trying to be a smart alec or stir up further controversy… rather just to make it clear in my mind… “If I were to enter the HoF contest (under these stated rules that Contes has allegedly broken)… and I used a happy snap that my sister-in law took of my family, myself included, would I be breaking the rules?” It’s my camera, I have begged and bribed my children to all sit still and smile, I have promised my husband all manner of “favours” that we won’t mention here LOL… and I have only handed her the camera and asked her to “point and shoot” because I don’t own a tripod… and for the life of me have NEVER been able to take a decent shot with the timer. Does this mean that the image is not my own? I have often wondered about such things in relation to photography in general… wedding photos for example… the photographer owns the “image”… but surely if I am that image… I should own it… it is ME afterall…mmmmmmm… I wonder what other’s think.