Loch Of The Lowes Osprey Webcam 2011 (1 Viewer)

[The Cumbrian]

As I understand it this is not correct. What happens is that the intellectual property holder shooses not to take action if it is not for commercial gain. However they are quite within their rights to take action if they want to. Breaking copyright is after all THEFT.

 

[June Atkinson]

Copyright

Yes, I agree. In law, any breaking of copyright is technically wrong. But I just feel that possibly SWT in prohibiting any copying or use for sharing, will shoot itself in the foot.

Is there something which has been a catalyst for this decision - something of which we are unaware?

As I understand it this is not correct. What happens is that the intellectual property holder shooses not to take action if it is not for commercial gain. However they are quite within their rights to take action if they want to. Breaking copyright is after all THEFT.

 

[Cartman]

I agree about the principle of copyright law being upheld, but it seems to me that by blocking all of their material, SWT will lessen their impact on both dedicated birdwatchers and the public. Or do they want all of the proceeds for SWT, regardless!
Normally, material can be copied provided it is not for commercial gain. Why are they being so tight-fisted about this?

June

I agree with this completely, I quite regularily post stuff on my facebook about the Osprey both at SWT and Locg Garten. It seems ridiculous that this is now banned. How are we expected to get make a wider audience aware of conservation....madness and in my opinion the SWT need to look to the much maligned RSPB as an example on how to market such things

 

[The Cumbrian]

I quite regularily post stuff on my facebook about the Osprey both at SWT and Locg Garten. It seems ridiculous that this is now banned.

Surely it was always banned but you chose to ignore (or didn't realise ) the fact and now you have been reminded. Or did SWT once make a statement that things were copyright free?

It may be my strange mind but if something is law then you can't pick and choose when and to whom it should apply. If the copyright owner wishes to make it copyright free fair enough.

 

[delia todd]

Morning all - another dreich day up here.

D

 

[Woop2y]

Our Lady is a bit bedraggled and sitting on the nest apparently scanning the skies probably wondering where 'her man' is. Hope he makes it back too - he is definitely worth waiting for I think

 

[Tiger_mz]

Surely it was always banned but you chose to ignore (or didn't realise ) the fact and now you have been reminded. Or did SWT once make a statement that things were copyright free?

It may be my strange mind but if something is law then you can't pick and choose when and to whom it should apply. If the copyright owner wishes to make it copyright free fair enough.

It is a difficult issue as it is just not black and white. After all without the input of the cam watchers there would be no pictures.

I have wondered about this for years as to whether the copyright belongs to the cam owner or the person who takes the capture. To my knowedge it has never been tested in court.

Only one cam has gone down the road of banning captures before and that was Hailuoto. It did not last for long and then they agreed that people could take pictures and publish them provided that they put the copyright on the capture. I can see this happening here too when interest falls away from LOTL.

 

[Henry B]

Not quite " free as a bird " then .

 

[delia todd]

Not quite " free as a bird " then .

You've been quiet of late Henry - great to see you and your wit back :-O

D

 

[The Cumbrian]

It is a difficult issue as it is just not black and white. After all without the input of the cam watchers there would be no pictures.

I have wondered about this for years as to whether the copyright belongs to the cam owner or the person who takes the capture. To my knowedge it has never been tested in court.

</quote>

Until it is tested in court we will obviously not know but I suspect the copyright would be with the person owning and running the equipement. This would seem to tie in with the idea of releases for shots of property etc.

<quote>
Only one cam has gone down the road of banning captures before and that was Hailuoto. It did not last for long and then they agreed that people could take pictures and publish them provided that they put the copyright on the capture. I can see this happening here too when interest falls away from LOTL.

The obvious answer assuming the Loch of the Lowes want pictures etc on the forums is to grant the right to publish. However to my warped mind you can't blame or criticise people/an organisation for controlling things any way THEY want to.

 

[Woop2y]

2.50pm Lady is interesting and wind swept and chowing down on a late lunch

 

[Redfinch]

Good morning. Urrrrr, Good afternoon to you in Scotland. I see Lady is blowing in the wind this day. Our weather here looks similiar. In fact we haven't seen the sun for 5 days and this a.m. reports of sleeting in the area.

 

[Henry B]

You've been quiet of late Henry - great to see you and your wit back :-O

D

Hi Delia , been busy with other things for a while but have kept a weather on , up the hill,..Waiting now for the Spey Bay birds to show face now . ....henry .:t:

 

[whodanny]

Hello all, very glad to find somewhere to keep up with the events at LOTL. I recognise a few of your usernames from the LOTL blog from last year. I was delighted to see our magnificent bird on her nest like she'd never been away on Monday night. Look forward to another "interesting" season, hopefully, not "that" interesting!. Same the coverage isn't yet up to previous standards. Nice to be here, Cheers, Danny.

 

[whodanny]

Oops, the typos have started already, I meant SHAME !

 

[Cartman]

Surely it was always banned but you chose to ignore (or didn't realise ) the fact and now you have been reminded. Or did SWT once make a statement that things were copyright free?

It may be my strange mind but if something is law then you can't pick and choose when and to whom it should apply. If the copyright owner wishes to make it copyright free fair enough.

I think in the past they have turned a blind eye but come on man what harm does it do, it's just a video clip for God's sake

 

[Cartman]

The obvious answer assuming the Loch of the Lowes want pictures etc on the forums is to grant the right to publish. However to my warped mind you can't blame or criticise people/an organisation for controlling things any way THEY want to.

you can't blame them but you can ask the question 'why on earth would they want to'

If this whole thing is about education and conservation then the more people that we inform the better

 

[Tiger_mz]

Surely it was always banned but you chose to ignore (or didn't realise ) the fact and now you have been reminded. Or did SWT once make a statement that things were copyright free?

It may be my strange mind but if something is law then you can't pick and choose when and to whom it should apply. If the copyright owner wishes to make it copyright free fair enough.

Sorry I did not see that at first. No it was not banned as SWT ran a competition where the first person to put in a capture of Marge returning last year would get a pair of binoculars. Such a competition would not be possible this year. So not only did SWT not frown on captures they actively encouraged them.

 

[raptorluver]

June we are breaking the copyright law if we copy any material from the SWT. That includes still and moving images. No more clips on youtube. We cant even copy and paste their daily blog like we used to. I used to post the rangers latest update on here bit its banned now.

Ann, I'm so pleased to be back and to have found you all....also very disappointed at how SWT is running things this year, and think in the long
run they are shooting themselves in the foot. The utube clips made this bird world famous, and generated such interest and, I think, $$$ for SWT.

So...very happy that she is back, that gallant and grand bird, and very sorry as a west coaster in America I will miss 98% of what is going on. I really
was transfixed with the whole traumatic experience last year, every gut wrenching minute of it, and this year they are really messing up over there!

Well, at least I can come here and keep up somewhat, till next time, bye!

 

[raptorluver]

Lady book

Did anyone from the US order the book from SWT? It has been 3 weeks and they still
haven't received my check, and now I'm afraid I won't get the book. Did anyone else have an experience with a slow check? Also, does anyone know if the book which can be preordered on Amazon, a different book or the same one? Thank you!!