Screenshots

crap...

i didn't know that taking photo could have been intellectual property infringment.

what a good Monday blue.

crap...

I would hope Chai gets his remedy when someone brings this up to Tony F's attention. AA tries to be efficient to keep costs down in order to maintain low fares, but certainly not by these means.

Tony, are you reading this? Restore our faith in you and your company!

Is it cheaper to pay the photo compare to getting a lawyer or hire a professional photographer?

Well, it seems somebody brain is kicked by ass. XX company boss should fired the person that did that.

Chai as a fellow photographer i support you all the way, This is a bully case Airasia a THIEF

BTW, since when TF from XX ask his staff to venture into Uncle Ho business ;)

I took this from somewhere about copyright, it reads:

"I took the photo, so I can use it however I want?
FALSE. Simply taking a photo of a person, company, brand, logo or the like does not afford you the right to sell merchandise featuring that photograph. There are two distinct intellectual property rights in a photograph: (1) the rights in the photograph itself and (2) the rights in the subject of the picture, such as the product or person shown in it. For example, if you take a photo of a celebrity, you only own the rights to the photo, but not the right to use the photo of a celebrity for merchandise sale. In order to sell merchandise with the image, you will need to obtain explicit permission from the celebrity."

Chaity, IMHO think you are only wrong if you were taking those photos and intended to use them for commercial purposes, but from what I read, you were actually giving them free advertisement! Tony F, see how lucky you were! Now your company are famous, have you forgotten some of the favours (even how small they were) some people had done? Ask your Mr A to hold up and give this guy a break-lah.

Chaity: According to Malaysia's Copyright Act 1987, the photos you have taken are protected by copyright and are your intellectual property. The airline cannot stop you from taking photos of their plane just as HP cannot stop you from taking photos of their computers and McDonald's cannot stop you from taking photos of their burgers and Siti Nurhaliza cannot stop you from taking photos of her face.

According to the copyright act, there are four prerequisites for protection. First, your work must fall under a category eligible for protection. Your photograph is an artistic work entitled to copyright protection.

Second, the photograph must be original. If it is, you have IP rights.

Third, the photograph has been reduced to material form. Since you have published it and (I am sure) you have a copy, you fulfil this criteria.

Fourth, you (I assume) are Malaysian and you took this picture in Malaysia. Thus you are protected by local law.

So you have the right.

To check if they have infringed your right, there are three elements. Firstly, there is a similarity in the photo they used and in yours. Since the photos are the same, there is no issue here.

Secondly, there is a causal connection i.e. the use of the photo can be linked to you. Since your photo is available on the Internet, there is a causal connection.

Thirdly, a substantial part of your work has been used. Since they used the whole picture, no question about this either.

They are liable for copyright infringement as any work at all that is available anywhere at all has copyright protection.

Personally, I hope you will pursue this legally because in Malaysia, copyright is not taken seriously enough. If we allow large corporations to get away scot free, this will lead to an erosion of ethics and our law in the long run.

Note: This information is based on my study of copyright law in university and on a copy of the act that I own. Before you decide to take legal action, you should consult a real lawyer.

As far as the law is concern, if the photographs is for personal use you have not infringed the rights.

I am a lawyer specializing in IP in Asia Pacific, email me if u need more advice.

I read the details in the A.Net forum that chaity invoiced the airline for use of his photographs.

So if he has invoiced them, it sounds to me like it is no longer for personal use and has infringed the copyright?

Thank you for all your suggestions, comments and time to look into this case.

I have no intention to go the legal way with them simply I do not want to spend for this unnecessary struggle.

All I wanted is for them to acknowledge at least I am the actual photographer.

Reaching them via telephone is a challenge either nobody is picking up or the person is not there. Left messages for them to callback and they never did.

At last my invoice faxed over to them did wake them up and start moving for this case.

My view for this is simple. They might say the IP is theirs that featured in my photos. So does another 500+ photos in the same website. If they are so protective of their IP, why don't they send their legal to the web owner ?

Instead of doing that, they took my photos and used them in their own website without informing me or provide credit in their website. How professional is this ?

Perhaps someone can answer this.

1. Can they use their own IP on their own website ?

2. Can they use my photos with their IP on their own website without my consent ?

3. By using my photos on their own website, can I say indirectly they are engaging my service ?

Perhaps someone can provide their view here. Thanks

This is what I think.

The photos (art work) is chaity's IP. What's in the photo is also AA's IP.

I think the issue in copyright here is both parties (chaity and the airline) can't use each other's creation for commercial purpose unless either party did obtained exclusive permission from the other before hand.

Chaity took the photo for personal use, that is, to show off his art work. On his website, he did not say its for sale.

In that context, I think he did not violate the copyright law. I hope a lawyer can confirm this.

But when AA stole his photo, AA violated the copyright law.

So, I think chaity has the right to bill them because they used his photos, though the logo is their IP.

Now, AA was saying that all chaity's art work belongs to them because it has their logo in it, is simply a bully!

Hi..just read about this. It's funny that XX airline is now running a Snap & Win contest. Here is an excerpt from their T&C.

"14. Each contestant additionally acknowledges that upon the submission of the entry/ies, all intellectual property rights over the photographs and/or images are surrendered to XX and such photographs and/or images shall become the property of XX who may utilize such photographs and/or images at its entire discretion, including but not limited to commercial , promotional or advertising purposes. The contestant shall have no further rights or claims to the photographs and/or images upon entering the contest."

Now they don't have to steal other people's photos off the net. People will willingly send them in.