Copyrighted Fish Images..
- Thread starter Mudfrog
- Start date
Yes. HaHa.
The question is; Did you declare your picture money for tax purposes??? I bet the answer is no. (I really want to know. Did you?)
Also, my main problem with this whole thread is that you made the guy selling the fish out to be a horrible criminal, when he really just didn't know he had done anything wrong or made anyone mad. I just think it's wrong to treat a person that way, no matter how important you think your pictures are. The fact is, you intentionally soiled this mans name, behind his back, and in a place where he can not stand up for himself. And as a person who is not pretentious enough to tell people he is a proffessor just to gain sway amongst his audience (dmed), i think that being another man's judge and jury is just a weasly thing to do.
The question is; Did you declare your picture money for tax purposes??? I bet the answer is no. (I really want to know. Did you?)
Also, my main problem with this whole thread is that you made the guy selling the fish out to be a horrible criminal, when he really just didn't know he had done anything wrong or made anyone mad. I just think it's wrong to treat a person that way, no matter how important you think your pictures are. The fact is, you intentionally soiled this mans name, behind his back, and in a place where he can not stand up for himself. And as a person who is not pretentious enough to tell people he is a proffessor just to gain sway amongst his audience (dmed), i think that being another man's judge and jury is just a weasly thing to do.
dominicolas;1998490; said:
If I recall correctly you do not need to claim wages made unless it's over $500 or something like that.. I didn't even make a tenth of that.
I did not make him out to be a horrible crimimal. I stated he stole my pictures for the sake of selling his inventory, I have no idea how that is making him out to be a horrible criminal. But the fact does remain he did take my pics, as well as others and on the others he removed the watermarks which is even worse then what he did with my pics.
I also stated I talked with him briefly and he seemed like a stand up guy, he just didn't go about the whole process the correct way. So I'm not sure what thread you have been following
I've only had someone pm me once to ask if they could use a pic for a research paper, I said sure. I was flattered to tell you the truth and I thought it was great that the person was polite enough to ask, some of you are acting like it's a big deal for someone to send a pm and ask permission...are manners out this year?
I exagerated, but I'm glad to see that you are letting everone know he's not a bad guy. You did make him out to be pretty bad though, through your phrasing and tone.
By the way, you are way off on the whole tax thing. Generally, the only way you can leagaly not claim income is when you make less than a certain amount of total income a year. I am sure that you make more than that amount, so you sir broke the law. It is that way because if under $500 was the rule real, then all transactions could be carried out in under $500 incriments and no taxes would ever be paid.
It's not like swat is going to bust down your doors, but you did break the law. A little more seriously than the ebay guy I might add because instead of infringing upon one person's copywrite, you have stolen from the American Public. That means you stole from most of the people on this forum. I think you owe us an apology,
By the way, you are way off on the whole tax thing. Generally, the only way you can leagaly not claim income is when you make less than a certain amount of total income a year. I am sure that you make more than that amount, so you sir broke the law. It is that way because if under $500 was the rule real, then all transactions could be carried out in under $500 incriments and no taxes would ever be paid.
It's not like swat is going to bust down your doors, but you did break the law. A little more seriously than the ebay guy I might add because instead of infringing upon one person's copywrite, you have stolen from the American Public. That means you stole from most of the people on this forum. I think you owe us an apology,
If it was any other type of non-internet business, the feedback would be quite different. You simply do not use someone else's image to sell something, otherwise expect a cease and desist order and a lawsuit. The fact it's on the internet does not change that fact. The internet is not so anonymous these days.
Chaitika;1998743; said:
I disagree. I see local independent lfs that have printed out images along with the name of the fish and the parameters and whatnot, all the time. I am sure they did not take the picture or pay for it, and I really can't imagine anyone complaining. The way I see it, this guy was just running his buisness the way he would if he wasn't on the internet, which seems to be the problem.
dominicolas;1998780; said:
Reason why no one made a stink about that is probably because the original photographer was not informed about it. One can only pursue action if they know what is going on.
On the Internet, it's tricky since anyone can view them. In an individual store, it just a matter of the right person coming in and noticing it.
You have to remember... playing the law (even if you are unaware of it) is like playing the lotto. Is the risk really worth it?
