Evamoon..How nice of you! And honets!

I have made so many mistakes in my little life:)

Good for you for saying..Oops sorry..
I know Ann..is very forgiving..:)
And appreciates you coming forward in such a disarming way.
:)
Kudos.
You didn't have to.And did!

Imitation may or may not be the sincerest form of flattery, but theft and imitation are two different things. Imitation is when I make a cake and then you make a cake very much like it. Stealing is when you take my cake--or my photograph of my cake--and tell people it's your own. Even young children are usually able to understand that distinction when their parents explain it to them clearly. I think most adults understand it perfectly well. Some just choose to ignore what they know. It's a slippery slope, and I like the fact that people are still willing to call others out on it. I disagree that the only time that harm is done is when someone loses money. Money shouldn't be our only yardstick for what's right and wrong.

Lovely photo of the granita, Miles.

To clarify, my recent post wasn't intended to be dismissive of Eva Moon's correction of her mistake. She did fine. My criticism is of those who post irresponsibly on the Internet, just because they can.

Jim

And....those of us who look for such things, notice that the picture doesn't match the recipe.
Eva's baklava has the nuts in one layer, the picture shows nuts inbetween many of the l;ayers.
The lovescakes person never mentioned raspberries in her recipe...but if you look at the picture you can plainly see that the berries are baked in the tart and not placed on after baking.
Also, I don't think all that recipe will fit into a 9 inch tart pan....and what's with the "tarte"? And she says to use a springform pan? and cook it in a bain marie? but steals a picture of a tart in a tart tin?
I maintain that that's not her recipe and that she has never made it!
And people post here "What's wrong with my.."whatever"? I found the reciep on the web and it didn't set up!?"
And someone here has to tell her that the reciupe she carefully made was very odd.
T and T from someone you trust is the best way to go.
Linda C

I've had pictures "stolen" from me, I did a round cactus cake with individual royal icing spikes and pink cactus flower. I posted it to a site and what do you know, 5 years later the site no longer exists but I see my pic on google images.

I was upset, but now I'm flattered. I really don't consider it theft unless someone broke on to my computer and took it without permission. By posting online we are allowing use.

So, would it follow that if someone takes and uses photos of my children that they will also assume my daughter's massive mall expenditures? And my drive my son around for job interviews?

Okay, a mom can dream.

I think we all can agree that using another persons' pictures is questionable at the least. To what degree is up to each individual person.
I think most people can agree that there is an issue of legality, but I seriously doubt anyone here not versed in copyright law is qualified to advise to the degree of ilegality (and googling a quick definition online doesn't count).
What I believe we all know is that no one here is going to be prosecuted, fined or jailed for using a picture of a tart, or someone elses' kids, or the front of someones house.
The solutions are really quite simple: Slap a huge-ass watermark on everything you post or don't post pictures at all. And ask yourself this: What am I willing to do if someone uses my picture, or poem, or song?
Ann did the right thing in confronting the individual and I think that whole situation seems to have come to an amicable resolution. The other 74 posts to this thread are another story...

My big problem with all of this is the "consumer" point of view. Jai posted a recipe with what was supposed to be a picture of what that recipe looked like when finished. As a consumer I expect the picture to actually be of the recipe she is posting. What she did would be similar to Disneyworld posting pictures of rides at Universal Studios to show me how great DW is, or for a restaurant to show pictures of food from another restaurant just to get me in their door. What she did was deceitful to consumers.

What's more perplexing is that she hasn't removed the photos! Or apologized...

dlynn - Reminds me of the disclaimer on a diner take-out menu I have: "Food photos are for suggestion only - actual platter will appear differently." And unless there is some Chinese tradition that has them photographing food only on those blue and white plates, I am thinking "suggestion photos" are pretty common. (Not that this has any relevance to this conversation.)

ginaw - Two questions: How does making money off of someone's pictures hurt the photographer if the photographer was not intending to make money off the pictures in the first place? If someone is making money with their blog and people come to their blog because they like the pictures, would those people not visit if credit was given?

By the way, yes, I think that using pictures without giving credit is at least morally wrong.

"What she did was deceitful to consumers."

I totally disagree with using the term "consumer". Anyone using a recipe they got online isn't a consumer at all, but a cook in a kitchen using someone elses' information. It's a risk one runs when you're not willing to pay money for an actual recipe in a book.

My favorite part is that the site displays a Creative Commons license! But Jai's not making a profit on this, and if she sells a cookbook, you've got the goods to get her book deal squashed.

Which begs the further discussion: Is using recipes you got online copyright infringement? What if you sell something you baked (from using a recipe obtained online) at a bakesale?
Just wondering....

This was taken right off their Terms Of Use for the site.

CONTENT SUBMITTED OR MADE AVAILABLE FOR INCLUSION ON THE SERVICE
You are solely responsible for the photos, profiles, recipe text, information, and other content that you upload, publish or display (hereinafter, "post") on or through the Service or the Site, or transmit to or share with other users (collectively the "User Content"). You may not post, transmit, or share User Content on the Site or Service that you did not create or that you do not have permission to post.

At the very least, she has violated that agreement and should take down the picture.

Eva, Welcome. I'm enjoying your blog, especially the story about the GPS with the Mother Superior attitude. And I think it takes class to go out of ones way to say, "I made a mistake." BTW, I'm the "other" Renee. I used to be here quite a bit, but I seldom cook anymore and mostly chime in on the "non cooking" topics. You'll find this group is comprised of some wonderful people, many of whom have met in person and are friends in "real life" because of this forum.

And now, between you and Linda posting baklava recipes, I sense myself in deep trouble because I feel compelled to make both recipes and compare the rewards or Turkish style vs. Greek style. Ladies, my hips do not thank you, but my taste buds probably will.

And addressed to the general conversation/thread --
We can hair-split technicalities of legality and copyright all day. And not to say that such things are not important, but we all know that just because something is "technically" legal does not make it the right thing to do. I can "legally" or "technically" get away with a lot of things that are reprehensible. I'm always saddened that our society has adopted this stance that a technicality absolves a wrong.

LOL miles you read my mind. There is also a ban on "sexually oriented" material, yet there is plenty of that to go around here, too. But much more to the point, consider this:

"If you are not the creator of such content, you also warrant that the holder of any Rights, including moral rights in such content, has completely and effectively waived all such rights and validly and irrevocably granted to you the right to grant the license stated above."

Have the authors of all the cookbooks, magazines, etc. whose recipes get quoted here daily given us the right to post them? Sounds like that is against the rules, even where we give credit.

And if you want to claim ownership of any picture you might think twice about posting it on GW because

"You also permit any visitor or member to access, display, view, store and reproduce such content solely for personal, noncommercial use."

I was thinking along the same line miles. What if someone makes a James Beard recipe, photographs it and does not give credit for the recipe?. This would be the same sort of theft imo.

Renee - You read MY mind. Finding a loophole to absolve yourself of poor moral fiber is just that. And if you don't see the difference between bad language, mild sexual innuendo and theft, well, I hope you have a good attorney.

Now that I know there are contributing members that feel that it's OK to use photos posted on this site without permission I will certainly stop posting photos. Thanks for the heads up, Foodonastump.

AM

AM - While you obviously read my last post, I hope you also read the one prior to that where I said, "By the way, yes, I think that using pictures without giving credit is at least morally wrong."

I do not think that anything that miles or I said, and possibly even kandm (I would have to re-read to be sure) on either of these threads would indicate that we think it is ok to use photos without permission.

I have not seen many other cases of theft mentioned here but let me ask, has it ever been a "contributing member" who has done this, or is it always someone from the outside who we do not even know. I will hope and assume the latter, which would mean you should be more concerned about the "moral fiber" of the general public than that of your friends here. To think that anything posted on the internet is safe from being re-used and reproduced by others is just plain naive in my opinion.

As far as it being just a "technicality" I do not see how one can fairly try to pick and choose which rules they choose to live with. It's ok to post "stolen" recipes, but it's not ok for others to steal yours? And what about someone who makes the slightest appearance of possibly trying to sell something? The GW police certainly jump all over them for that technicality.

To be sure, what I personally think is right and wrong varies greatly from what may be legally right or wrong. But IMP we have to accept that in the end we all agreed to the terms of agreement.

Calling the issue of stealing a photo from another's website and posting it as your own....and accepting compliments on how very very good it looks by the way...petty when it is clearly theft, is like calling someone who steals a package of lifesavers not a thief. Yes a petty thief, but none the less a thief. And people have been fined and put on probation for just such thefts.

As for using a recipe and selling the product being a copyright infringement....you know the answer, you were playing devil's advocate.
Recipes have long been protected, that's why some people often left out a key ingredient when passing along recipes and that's another reason why Emeril's recipes call for his own spice blend rather than measured ingredients....well that and the profit from sales.

Ann's just a little ol' homemaker who works part time in a retail store....but she takes beautiful photographs and cooks very very well.
I woulder what would happen if someone stole a picture from Martha Stewart's site and tried to pass it off as their own?
Linda C

Foodonastuump, Thank you.

I'm not worked up nor am I in any way losing sleep over the fact that my photos are being used on other websites. I've found my photos all over the place. In fact, last year I received an email from a magazine in Britian, asking permission to use

Kandm, I do find it interesting and rather amusing that you want to keep this going and that you actually started another thread to continue the discussion.

I think that everyone is entitled to their opinion. That is one of the many things that helps to make the Cooking forum the great place that it is. In this case though, yours just seems to be in the minority.

Ann

There are over 90 posts in this thread, I'm not sure if I'm keeping anything going alone.... I just happened to disagree with the thrust of the posts. As for being in the minority for my opinion, that doesn't bother me much. I agree who ever she was clearly lied about the picture origins, regardless, it is a tempest in a teacup imo. Besides, the posts (mine as well) are probably better suited for the discussion area. Cheers.

Look at this amazing cake I made!!!

{{gwi:1548258}}

Miles--you are a hoot!! I knew you would make and impression on this forum!

Cathy

Something like this came up on the Kitchen Table forum. A person was looking for pictures to go with the words for the song, "My Favorite Things". Especially ones for "and crisp apple strudels; and schnitzel with noodles." Most people, me included, posted their own pictures to go with the different lyrics. Another person suggested just taking some images off the web and using them.

So I wrote this and it went over like a lead balloon. This just popped into my head. Is it OK to post pictures that aren't yours? Unless you have permission from the person who took them, I don't think so. I know you can find pictures on the web that would fit, but I feel you should always ask permission first. I wouldn't want someone to post my pictures on another forum without asking first. Also doesn't it involve copyright and it is illegal to post someone else's pictures. Just something to think about.
Clare

I almost feel reluctant to post here because of claims I might "want to keep this going" but I'm not the only one posting so.... :p

It's pretty cool you felt free to state your beliefs aptosca, even though it went over like a lead balloon lol. I hope no one was rude to you or anything for having an unpopular opinion.

I wonder how the use of public domain applies to this topic.

What a great cake! It looks extremely lifelike--I'd almost swear it was a real human head! ;o)

Just because something is out on the Internet does not make it public domain. Public domain applies to things that have been around so long that copyrights have expired. I've done a bit of research on copyrights because a lot of my furniture designs have been copyrighted, and I was not given credit. When I designed my first original torchère, I told the owner of the company that she could copyright it because it was an original design. I also asked her to put my name on the copyright, which she said she would, since I designed it without any input from her. She would not publicly acknowledge my designs, and she put her own name on them for the tear sheets, along with designs she stole from other designers that had lapsed into public domain. A couple of years after our discussion about the copyright, my boss had a retrospective show at FIDM in downtown L.A. At the exhibit were copies of the copyrights to my designs, and my name was not on them! This, in addition to be contrary to what I was promised, is blatantly illegal - the law states that credit must be given to the actual designer - not to the owner of the design. My boss claimed that she owned everything I did and that she could put her name on any of my designs as she pleased. You might be able to imagine how I felt to see my creative work passed off as belonging to someone else! Not only that, but a chandelier that I designed (bearing her name) was named "Best Interior Lighting of 1999" by the International Association of Interior Designers, and no mention of my name was given, and so most people are unaware that I am the real designer of this piece. That chandelier was chosen by Arch. Digest to be photographed for a story they were doing and was published with an article about our showroom. They considered it to be the most interesting and innovative design in the showroom.

Throughout history furniture designers have put their names on works they did not create, and so this is nothing new but nevertheless disturbing - at least to me. Unfortunately, I never had enough capital to start my own furniture company (nor the business sense), and so I continue to design for others with no credit given to my name. I want my work to continue to be copyrighted, but I also want credit to be given where it is due. Many people in the high end furniture industry are aware of my contributions, but it doesn't go much further than there.

As for Ann's photography... I once asked her if I could use her photo for my recipe site because she had made one of my recipes (Deviled Crab) and had posted a photo of it. I had never photographed my recipe, and Ann agreed to allow me to use her photo on my site, and I gave her credit for the photography as well. Sadly, a hacker has attacked my recipe site, and that is one of the recipes that he has removed.

Many recipes are not able to be copyrighted, just as many furniture designs cannot be copyrighted. The recipe for bread dough would be one of the cases where public domain comes into play, as would the design of a simple chair or table.

Lars

Wouldn't you get a patent and have a trademark for your design, not a copy right?

A patent and a copyright are pretty much the same thing. A trademark is for the company logo.

Lars

"A patent and a copyright are pretty much the same thing."

If it is true that your work is copyrighted the second it is created, then copyright is EXTREMELY different from a patent that you have to apply for and assume the burden of proving it does not infringe upon any previously granted patent. To me that sounds like comparing carrots to celery.

I once sent the recipe for "Cake of a 100 Faces" to a friend who loves good food AND writes cookbooks as well as a newspaper column. I told her specifically that this recipe came from Sunset magazine and so wasn't for publication without their permission. Well.... she put it in her next cookbook unchanged and "un-permissioned" saying only that it was from her "good friend, Westelle, in California".... like as if she didn't know where it came from. I was/am soooo pi$$ed at her I haven't spoken to her since.

When someone comes up with anything original they at least deserve the credit for it, if not compensation, whether its a lamp design or a recipe or a photograph.

People "steal" recipes so much, it is bad taste imo, esp if you're accepting compliments for it as if the entire recipe sprung up from your own brain, but whatever. What if your friend had changed a few simple details about the recipe, would it have been ok then? It would still be a copy to me.

$5 says if you do a search for the recipe that started this whole thread "White Chocolate Cream Cheese Tart " you will find many very similar ones with only a few minor differences. Either with the tart recipe itself, or the proportion of ingredients of the filling. Whose came first, who was influenced by whom? It's pretty irrelevant on a site where the main interest is in tasty, reliable recipes.

My work has to be copyrighted within a year of it being introduced to the market - otherwise it is not eligible. When a copyright is granted, we get a patent number. With furniture, no copyright is granted unless we prove that it does not infringe on any other copyright. It might be different for different products. It is different with regards to literature. Anyway, with furniture, copyrights are not granted without patents, which is why I said they were essentially the same. Literature is a totally different story.

Lars

Miles--If you copied someone else's recipes for your book or your Pillsbury bakeoff entry, then you're in trouble. (Like Mrs. Seinfeld.) But if you bake something from Martha and sell it at your school bake sale, there's no harm to Martha. You could tell people that you developed that recipe, but so what--your fellow bakers would know you're a fibber, but there's no harm to Martha. If you claimed that she came over to your house and baked it with her two hands, and that's why it should cost $4000, then that's fraud. But only if someone actually pays that.

Good point, idee'.

I think hairs are being split at this point. Taken literally, many of the previous post authors' would void 95% of the current internet content for being a copy of someone elses' "work".
Perhaps what's really at issue is one's personal comfort level. Those of us reading this thread, and be extension every other blog & forum, are in danger of potential recreating someone elses' work.

Westelle, in my writing there is only room for 1 degree of seperation. A friend can give me a whole, drawn-out history of the origins of their recipe I want to use in my column, but I have neither the space nor incliniation to include an extra 150-300 words of details that my editor will probably delete anyway. In publishing words are money. The less words printed, the less someone is payed. It may not sound "right" but it is the way of the world.

I will fishish by saying that I have and will continue to use internet content (pictures, verbage, video clips, etc) when it helps me to make a point or to express myself when time doesn't allow me to create my own method.
I do not feel inclined to give credit to every Tom, Dick and Harry who posted a picture on the internet that I use. I also know that the same might happen to me and the thousands of pictures I've posted. Such is life.

The 10 big myths about copyright are explained here ...

Lars - copyright and patent are totally different things and have very different rules including different lengths that they apply.

For furniture appearance, I think what applies is a design patent. I'm not very familiar with that since utility patents are generally what applies to my work. My attorneys have always said that it was important for a patent to have the names of the actual inventors.

Clare, I'm sorry your suggestion went over like a lead balloon.

Miles, too funny.

Kandm, it wasn't a recipe that started this thread it was a Photo.

Lars, is there nothing you can do to have your name added to your design?

Ann

That was a very informative articel, ohiomom. Thank you for posting the link. The primary difference that sticks out in my mind is whether the pilfered material has any commercial value. So far as I can see or have read no one here (except myself?) has posted anything of commercial value.

I just wonder if it wouldn't have been better suited for the "Conversation" area of the forum if it doesn't involve an actual recipe.

Probably, as should your "copyrighting images" thread, and all the birthday threads, but at least this one was "saved" at one point with Linda C's baklava recipe!

Where is the conversation area, please?

Evamoon, on the homepage of the Cooking Forum, you will see links for other topics: Gallery, Exchanges and Conversations.

Ann

Ok, so if I post a recipe in the copyright thread it's going to be "saved" and on topic? I never would have posted a follow up if this was in the conversation thread, since I don't bother going there. Many don't, which is probably why this was posted in main thread, even though it's totally off topic.

This is the cooking forum not the recipe exchange. My understanding is that we should be talking cooking. I suppose it could that this thread was at least remotely related to cooking topics since the pictures and sites in question were all food related. A weak argument, I know, but not like she came here talking about a new flea shampoo that is working well on her dog or something.

There are many non-cooking related threads that last here, and so far yours has as well.

We are a pretty relaxed group of friends here on the Cooking forum and as you have probably noticed we cover a wide range of topics. Most of us aren't all that concerned about what is posted here as long as it is somewhat related to Cooking. Most of us post more recipes here than we do on the Recipe Exchange.

Technically, some of our topics probably should be on conversations, including birthdays, but most of us aren't anal about that, and thankfully neither are the powers-that-be on iVillage.

Ann

kandm, what comments section; did you mean to say "conversations" ?

there are very few OT's on the cooking forum, I like the fact that they are left there; there are a lot in the decorating forum and they are quickly moved to "conversations", but those OT's are usually so unrelated to decorating, such as "OT: what kind of face cream do you use?"

those of you who don't know about "conversations" should check it out, a wide range of topics are discussed and the more the merrier......

since food pictures are a big part of the enjoyment of this forum, I find it fitting that the debate happened in discussions.

Exactly. And I have since checked out more on opensourcefood.com. I've also checked out recipes in Bakersfield. The same thing happended a while back when someone posted a recipe from another blog without giving credit. The "owner" of the blog posted on here to complain and that's when I discovered a wonderful new blog with some delicious new recipes. I don't always have time to read the converstions stuff and I might have missed it. I think Ann did the right thing posting it on here.

I, however, was wrong in posting my question about the Bar Mitzvah on here yesterday -- it was totally not food related. But I needed an answer in a hurry and I knew I could trust the advice of some people on here. I was afraid if I posted it on conversations I wouldn't get an answer soon enough. So, I abused the CF.