Jump to content

plagiarism of Astro Images

Deneb

By Deneb
in The Astro Lounge

Recommended Posts

Deneb

Deneb

Posted
Posted

Hi

Has anyone accounted this & how have they dealt with this problem ?

I think someone's taking credit for my work !

I noticed one of my pictures, this one in particular:

http://www.skywatcher.com/swtinc/gallery_view.php?id=465

I took this last year & was presented in Issue 65 of S@N Magazine October 2010.

Also shown on SGL:

Stargazers Lounge - Deneb's Album: Skywatcher MN190 - Picture

Nadeem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Sailor

The Sailor

Posted
Posted

I have seen on here, a number of times, photographs of the same subject which have been taken by different people, including myself and have wondered the same. But it is not something I am going to worry about as with so many photos of the night sky there will be duplication and will be almost 99.9% the same.

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Celeste

Celeste

Posted
Posted

Best way to overcome something like this, add a watermark over your images....it can spoil the image a little, but it's very hard to remove :) I have had to do this on my images (digital arts) as people were taking my images, changing them slightly then claiming as their own...makes you mad :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pook

pook

Posted
Posted

contact the administrator of the sight, and demand it's taken down. Provide evidence that it is your shot, and he/she is legally obliged to remove it. As the author of the work, you own sole copyright under law.

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

To make things easier in the future you can digitally watermark images using a system such as DigiMarc

https://www.digimarc.com/tech/dwm.asp

Also, always post up images with a suitable copyright notice in this format.

©2011 David Gregory. All Moral Rights Asserted.

That last bit is important, as Moral Rights are entirely separate from Copyright. Moral rights give you the right to not have anyone edit your work, even if they acknowledge copyright. They can't misrepresent in other words. Unlike copyright however, this is not automatically granted, and you have to specify that you wish to assert your moral rights... hence the wording.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rocketandroll

rocketandroll

Posted
Posted

Hey Nadeem...

The angle certainly looks identical though the one on the SW site is obviously lower res so it's hard to check for sure.

Have you tried overlaying them and scaling to check if it's exactly the same framing and alignment?

If it is, I'd say the odds of it being a coincidence are minimal.

I'd make the guy who has his name against it your first port of call. See if he has any viable explanation. If he doesn't, give him a week or so to contact SW, explain what he's done, appologise and have his name taken off it or go to them yourself with the original image and ask them to do it.

Hopefully embarassement will make him do the right thing.

I've not seen plagiarism in astro images though I'm sure it happens... I'm also involved in sci-fi modelling and I've seen a few cases of people entering other people's work in International competitions and winning with it, then being caught out online.

It's possibly a little harder to prove with astro images as its so much easier to tweak an image slightly, re-frame it and claim its a different image.

Best of luck following this up... would be interested to know how it goes!

Ben

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deneb

Deneb

Posted
  • Author
Posted
contact the administrator of the sight, and demand it's taken down. Provide evidence that it is your shot, and he/she is legally obliged to remove it. As the author of the work, you own sole copyright under law.

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

To make things easier in the future you can digitally watermark images using a system such as DigiMarc

https://www.digimarc.com/tech/dwm.asp

Also, always post up images with a suitable copyright notice in this format.

©2011 David Gregory. All Moral Rights Asserted.

That last bit is important, as Moral Rights are entirely separate from Copyright. Moral rights give you the right to not have anyone edit your work, even if they acknowledge copyright. They can't misrepresent in other words. Unlike copyright however, this is not automatically granted, and you have to specify that you wish to assert your moral rights... hence the wording.

Thanks Pook, thats useful info.

Nadeem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Si W

Si W

Posted
Posted
contact the administrator of the sight, and demand it's taken down. Provide evidence that it is your shot, and he/she is legally obliged to remove it. As the author of the work, you own sole copyright under law.

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

To make things easier in the future you can digitally watermark images using a system such as DigiMarc

https://www.digimarc.com/tech/dwm.asp

Also, always post up images with a suitable copyright notice in this format.

©2011 David Gregory. All Moral Rights Asserted.

That last bit is important, as Moral Rights are entirely separate from Copyright. Moral rights give you the right to not have anyone edit your work, even if they acknowledge copyright. They can't misrepresent in other words. Unlike copyright however, this is not automatically granted, and you have to specify that you wish to assert your moral rights... hence the wording.

I was actually look Copyrights up last week but got distracted with something else at work, thanks for posting this information, it has opened my eye's, i didn't know about the Moral rights.

Cheers

Si

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve 1962

Steve 1962

Posted
Posted

I see what you mean about fov etc. - but I think your image is infinately better than the Skywatcher one.

Granted there are a huge number of variations in image size, orientation, colour etc but with lots of people imaging the same objects aren't we bound get coincidences??

It could also be a genuine mistake - the title says "Photo taken with 50mm lens piggybacked on the SK P15075EQ3-2. Exposed for 10 minutes at f 2.8, Fuji provia 400F slide film. Trees are added to make a nice scene."

"Trees"? "50mm lens"? - I don't think so

EDIT << Sorry Nadeem - this "crossed in the post" with the other guys' comments>>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.