Roger Mellie
New member
f*** me top work guys - this tricky fraudster stands to make 62p if you don't put an end to his evil ways. 
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Ebay - grrrr
- Thread starter fatboy
- Start date
Lady Bracknell
Handbag at Dawn
Hi Tom,
Yes, amazingly, the broadband is still working...*rushes to find wooden objects*...
I can confirm , 227 BHA that copyright is something vested in the author/creator of the work. Whether or not they are a professional in that field.
Unfortunately, most copyright thieves go instantly on the defensive and claim that copyright is irrelevant for whatever reason they've just dreamed up. And it's easy to be browbeaten into some sort of submission. Even the most "reputable" of organisations can try this trick despite dealing quite differently with professional photographers!
I'm afraid there's a hell of a lot of chancing bastards out there.
Yes, amazingly, the broadband is still working...*rushes to find wooden objects*...
I can confirm , 227 BHA that copyright is something vested in the author/creator of the work. Whether or not they are a professional in that field.
Unfortunately, most copyright thieves go instantly on the defensive and claim that copyright is irrelevant for whatever reason they've just dreamed up. And it's easy to be browbeaten into some sort of submission. Even the most "reputable" of organisations can try this trick despite dealing quite differently with professional photographers!
I'm afraid there's a hell of a lot of chancing bastards out there.
Lady Bracknell
Handbag at Dawn
Roger Mellie said:f*** me top work guys - this tricky fraudster stands to make 62p if you don't put an end to his evil ways.
I don't care whether he makes 62p or £62. I make my living by taking photographs and I'm not about to sit back and watch him undermine my income when all he had to do was acquire it legitimately. Work, which, if it had been acquired legitimately might at least look some sense unlike the cacked-up picture he's trying to sell.
Do you regularly stand in the street and invite people to help themselves to your pay packet?
But leaving the actual money aside, there's a reason why copyright law exists and there are principles at stake here.
Last edited:
Roger Mellie
New member
No but I regularly do work for which I am not paid. I see nothing wrong with that. How much do you usually sell the photograph for that has the signature on it and how many do you sell? Is the signature the thing of value in this instance and if you put the photo on ebay without it would it sell?
I in no way seek to belittle the photograph or your trade (I wanted to become a photographer) but in the instance of autographs is it really about the photo? The autograph is on ebay for 62p and I can't imagine it is going to get much more. If the seller is so desperate as to do this for a living then
I pity him.
Virgo's Haircut
Resident Train Guru
Roger Mellie said:
Yes, but it seems he has sold many many photographs, and reguarly sells about 10 or more a day, which could make him £70 a week if a photo gets a £1 average.
What if he sells a signed photo of David Beckham which a budding photographer has taken and pockets the £100 it may make? Is that ok?
Lady Bracknell
Handbag at Dawn
I take your point, Roger about working for nothing 'cos we've all done it! However there's still a world of difference between working for nowt (or at least a less than commercial rate) yourself and watching someone else make the decision for you. And then go on to try and make a profit out of it!
It's probably worth saying that selling an AUTOGRAPH of Dan Harding isn't in breach of any copyright I hold. It's the right to resell the PICTURE that's at issue because no such rights were granted to this individual and, if he did download it from the website, he didn't acquire the picture ligitimately.
But if, for example, someone had bought that picture from me and got it signed by Dan Harding then, without going into small print conditions of sale stuff, it's up to them what they do with it.
In those circumstances they haven't bought the copyright of the picture - that always stays with me and they aren't at liberty to assume any transferable copyright to it - but they do OWN the print that they've bought. If they want to sell it as Dan Harding's autograph, that's what is up for sale. An autograph.
And, to be honest, provided someone doesn't then bung it up on eBay as "A Photograph I took of Dan Harding which just happens to be autographed", I'm not going to get bothered. Although if they'd bought the print, it'd state quite clearly whose work it was on the back of the picture!!! Not that there's a breathless world out there at all impressed by owning one of my originals...
It's probably worth saying that selling an AUTOGRAPH of Dan Harding isn't in breach of any copyright I hold. It's the right to resell the PICTURE that's at issue because no such rights were granted to this individual and, if he did download it from the website, he didn't acquire the picture ligitimately.
But if, for example, someone had bought that picture from me and got it signed by Dan Harding then, without going into small print conditions of sale stuff, it's up to them what they do with it.
In those circumstances they haven't bought the copyright of the picture - that always stays with me and they aren't at liberty to assume any transferable copyright to it - but they do OWN the print that they've bought. If they want to sell it as Dan Harding's autograph, that's what is up for sale. An autograph.
And, to be honest, provided someone doesn't then bung it up on eBay as "A Photograph I took of Dan Harding which just happens to be autographed", I'm not going to get bothered. Although if they'd bought the print, it'd state quite clearly whose work it was on the back of the picture!!! Not that there's a breathless world out there at all impressed by owning one of my originals...
Last edited:
Lady Bracknell
Handbag at Dawn
Don't tell them your name, Pike. 
nail-Z
Well-known member
Well - that worked!