Edited photo of buses
-
Seems like this SBS8112J will never understand the meaning of COPYRIGHT infringement... sigh...
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
Original source of photo: http://sbs9199c.fotopic.net/p46335449.html
Sorry, but I never grant you to use my photo to edit. It's been clearly stated in my welcome message that you need permission to use my photos. Please remove it asap. Thank you. -
i think Tamago will have to delete or edit those posts which uses other pictures. Or might as well close this thread.
-
lol i think close better lol
-
zzz i am new to here zz can i show some un-copyrighted pics here?
If anyone complains that that pic is you took that maybe that you are 50% right and 50% wrong .
maybe this is lame and this is cool!
-
SBS8112J, I can tell that you have a talent in editing the pictures. However, the photos you've taken to edit do not belong to you in the first place. I know you claimed that you have emailed the owner of the photo for permission, but you have not receive his grant. So you have no right to use the picture until he officially give you the
green light. It is an offence.
The images are considered an interllectual property. You can be sued for infringing copyright. I am sure you would not want to get yourself into trouble right? I suggest you should take pictures by yourself, and edit your own pictures. I am not chiding you but giving you an advice. You can choose not to listen, no one would stop you any further. We have given you advises,and we hope you would understand the situation. You are still young, it is not worth it leaving behind a record.
Good luck.
-
Under the Copyright Act Cap 63 Section 25(1) & (2),
In the case of a copyright of which (whether as a result of a partial assignment or otherwise) different persons are the owners in respect of its application to —
(a) the doing of different acts or classes of acts; or
(b) the doing of one or more acts or classes of acts in different countries or at different times,
the owner of the copyright, for any purpose of this Act, shall be deemed to be the person who is the owner of the copyright in respect of its application to the doing of the particular act or class of acts, or to the doing of the particular act or class of acts in the particular country or at the particular time, as the case may be, that is relevant to that purpose, and a reference in this Act to the prospective owner of a future copyright of which different persons are the prospective owners shall have a corresponding meaning.
Without prejudice to subsection (1), where under any provision of this Act a question arises whether an article of any description has been imported or sold, or otherwise dealt with, without the licence of the owner of any copyright, the owner of the copyright, for the purpose of determining that question, shall be taken to be the person entitled to the copyright in respect of its application to the making of articles of that description in the country into which the article was imported, or, as the case may be, in which it was sold or otherwise dealt with.
And in Section 27(2),
Subject to the provisions of this Act, where an original literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work has been published —
(a) copyright shall subsist in the work; or
(b) if copyright in the work subsisted immediately before its first publication, copyright shall continue to subsist in the work,
if, but only if —
(c) the first publication of the work took place in Singapore;
(d) the author of the work was a qualified person at the time when the work was first published; or
(e) the author died before that time but was a qualified person immediately before his death
From Section 31(1):
Subject to the provisions of this Act, the copyright in a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work is infringed by a person who, not being the owner of the copyright, and without the licence of the owner of the copyright, does in Singapore, or authorises the doing in Singapore of, any act comprised in the copyright.
All quoted from Singapore Statutes Online
-
Originally posted by service_238:
Under the Copyright Act Cap 63 Section 25(1) & (2),
In the case of a copyright of which (whether as a result of a partial assignment or otherwise) different persons are the owners in respect of its application to —
(a) the doing of different acts or classes of acts; or
(b) the doing of one or more acts or classes of acts in different countries or at different times,
the owner of the copyright, for any purpose of this Act, shall be deemed to be the person who is the owner of the copyright in respect of its application to the doing of the particular act or class of acts, or to the doing of the particular act or class of acts in the particular country or at the particular time, as the case may be, that is relevant to that purpose, and a reference in this Act to the prospective owner of a future copyright of which different persons are the prospective owners shall have a corresponding meaning.
Without prejudice to subsection (1), where under any provision of this Act a question arises whether an article of any description has been imported or sold, or otherwise dealt with, without the licence of the owner of any copyright, the owner of the copyright, for the purpose of determining that question, shall be taken to be the person entitled to the copyright in respect of its application to the making of articles of that description in the country into which the article was imported, or, as the case may be, in which it was sold or otherwise dealt with.
And in Section 27(2),
Subject to the provisions of this Act, where an original literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work has been published —
(a) copyright shall subsist in the work; or
(b) if copyright in the work subsisted immediately before its first publication, copyright shall continue to subsist in the work,
if, but only if —
(c) the first publication of the work took place in Singapore;
(d) the author of the work was a qualified person at the time when the work was first published; or
(e) the author died before that time but was a qualified person immediately before his death
From Section 31(1):
Subject to the provisions of this Act, the copyright in a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work is infringed by a person who, not being the owner of the copyright, and without the licence of the owner of the copyright, does in Singapore, or authorises the doing in Singapore of, any act comprised in the copyright.
All quoted from Singapore Statutes Online
Whee! Long posts. So why did you post this up. 8112 is gone. never to return.
-
Originally posted by SBS8033D:zzz i am new to here zz can i show some un-copyrighted pics here?
If anyone complains that that pic is you took that maybe that you are 50% right and 50% wrong .
maybe this is lame and this is cool!
u just simply cut and paste u dunno photoshop? there are loops around in ya foto....look at right edge of the bus....
-
Originally posted by service_238:
Under the Copyright Act Cap 63 Section 25(1) & (2),
In the case of a copyright of which (whether as a result of a partial assignment or otherwise) different persons are the owners in respect of its application to —
(a) the doing of different acts or classes of acts; or
(b) the doing of one or more acts or classes of acts in different countries or at different times,
the owner of the copyright, for any purpose of this Act, shall be deemed to be the person who is the owner of the copyright in respect of its application to the doing of the particular act or class of acts, or to the doing of the particular act or class of acts in the particular country or at the particular time, as the case may be, that is relevant to that purpose, and a reference in this Act to the prospective owner of a future copyright of which different persons are the prospective owners shall have a corresponding meaning.
Without prejudice to subsection (1), where under any provision of this Act a question arises whether an article of any description has been imported or sold, or otherwise dealt with, without the licence of the owner of any copyright, the owner of the copyright, for the purpose of determining that question, shall be taken to be the person entitled to the copyright in respect of its application to the making of articles of that description in the country into which the article was imported, or, as the case may be, in which it was sold or otherwise dealt with.
And in Section 27(2),
Subject to the provisions of this Act, where an original literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work has been published —
(a) copyright shall subsist in the work; or
(b) if copyright in the work subsisted immediately before its first publication, copyright shall continue to subsist in the work,
if, but only if —
(c) the first publication of the work took place in Singapore;
(d) the author of the work was a qualified person at the time when the work was first published; or
(e) the author died before that time but was a qualified person immediately before his death
From Section 31(1):
Subject to the provisions of this Act, the copyright in a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work is infringed by a person who, not being the owner of the copyright, and without the licence of the owner of the copyright, does in Singapore, or authorises the doing in Singapore of, any act comprised in the copyright.
All quoted from Singapore Statutes Online
That's what my book of Law teaches me exactly. -
Originally posted by SBS8033D:
zzz i am new to here zz can i show some un-copyrighted pics here?
If anyone complains that that pic is you took that maybe that you are 50% right and 50% wrong .
maybe this is lame and this is cool!
Hello SBS8112J
-
Originally posted by SBS 233 X:
Hello SBS8112J
-
Originally posted by SBS8033D:
zzz i am new to here zz can i show some un-copyrighted pics here?
If anyone complains that that pic is you took that maybe that you are 50% right and 50% wrong .
maybe this is lame and this is cool!
This suck. I didnt know that a van with just one axle and 1/4 body ever exists.
-
I not 8112J okie? He is just my friend!
-
I got permission from ngjy22 to edit this
-
Originally posted by SBS8033D:
I not 8112J okie? He is just my friend!
Your friend? Then I'm sure he will listen to you. So please tell him about copyright. Unless of course you ARE 8112J, just that you changed accounts and this is your lousy attempt to fool us.
Anyway, I'm surprised some of us study Law. Abit cheem to me.........
-
Originally posted by Scania N113CRB luver:
This suck. I didnt know that a van with just one axle and 1/4 body ever exists.
LOL. Dun be so critical.. the edited picture does reflect some creativity on the part of the editor after all. =)
-
Originally posted by Simple_boi:
Oh.. Shld i say sorry to u that copyright is ok?
If i were to sue you for copyright, who will win the case?
I study Law.
What can u argue to me right now?
Haha. Using the fact that you study Law to scare people. NUS or SMU? -
Originally posted by SBS 9613Z:
Haha. Using the fact that you study Law to scare people. NUS or SMU?
I believe you are not intellectual enough that the universities are not the only place with law lecturers. -
Guys, aren't we about to 'derail' off the topic?
-
-duplicate-
-
Originally posted by tintinspartan:
Guys, aren't we about to 'derail' off the topic?
somehow...yar
-
Originally posted by SBS 9613Z:
Haha. Using the fact that you study Law to scare people. NUS or SMU?
So what if i am trying to scare you?Are you capable to scare me?
If not, keep quiet.
-
What happens if...
-
Originally posted by TWS4793:
What happens if...
never possible, unless the Bt Timah & 6th ave people decided to ditch their cars for buses,