ICMag Copyright Statement

[Skip]

Copyright Statement

All artwork and content found on ICMag or other sites owned or operated by ICMag are copyright IC Magazine Ltd. No part of these sites may be copied or reproduced in any manner without the express permission of ICMag. This means you may not copy icons, graphics, photographs, artwork, content, etc. and use in anyway without writing us and getting permission. We have on numerous occasions given permission for certain specific things (for which we have original copyright) to be published elsewhere, especially for educational purposes.

Submissions

All submissions to ICMag, including (but not limited to) postings, images, e-mails, creative works (articles, images, etc.), and other such voluntarily contributed material become the property of ICMag to publish on websites owned by ICMag, in books, magazines or other printed materials published by ICMag, in related materials (compilations), advertising materials, and other materials generated by ICMag unless specific instructions otherwise are included with the posting or submission. In other words, by submitting or posting something to ICMag you are conveying a limited right to ICMag to publish the work within ICMag's publishing domain. You still retain all other rights to your works.

It is understood that these contributed works are given freely, to be published by ICMag, in whatever manner it chooses without compensation to the author. ICMag by accepting and publishing an author's work does so without charge for reviewing, editing, posting, or maintaining the work on the site or in other publications. It is understood that this free exposure and publication is sufficient compensation to the author.

In some cases ICMag will negotiate for the rights to a large work to be published and a contract will be drawn. If you have a substantial work you would like to see published, please contact us. We are seeking works for publication on the Internet and in traditional formats, like International Cannagraphic Magazine. This publication is regularly looking for high quality stories and images.

[truecannabliss]

That dont sound very good to me either, kinda like a big '' fuck you, put it on our site and we can do as we please'' type statement.......i dont really have a problem with whats being said at the moment but its just the way it comes across and the longer term implications that concern me.
Peace
p.s i need to start reading posts like these when they go up.

[Farmer John]

LMAO :D

[GMT]

The way around the legality of that is to add a signature like mine. Then anything you want to retain the copyrights to you just attach your own signature. Now you know why all of my photos have my siganture under them.

[truecannabliss]

I had a pic of mine published in Weed world magazine....and to make it more annoying others were given credit.......i made several sarcastic comments at the time. Here is the link.
http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=12913
Peace

[Babbabud]

Old news find some new drama....NWM has left before ..... this post was here when everyone signed up and like indigo said admin has never been like this .... these are friends ... they have always treated us with respect dont see why it would change. NWM prolly just wanted a new nick anyways....not the first time.
He knows his way back believe me . Can we grow some weed ?
nam myoho renge kyo

[cough_cough_eer]

Wow! who tt'd in your bong this morning NWM. Kinda what one would expect from some of the new OG'ers around here..I'm sure it just a disclaimer to cover any unforseeable problems, like at mcDonals has for its coffee" contents might be hot"


But since we are being silly, I'll bring up this senerio,

Say, I take an image from the internet (for an avatar) that happens to be copyrighted(unknown to me of course) and the owner of the image wants to be reinbursed or whatever, Whos avatar is it ???? ICmag? mine? the person I made it for?


disclaimer........
I did look into this, briefly,(for the avatars) and I am vaguely familial with copyright law, There is a lot of grey area here but , depending on how you get possesion of the image, the worst they can ,do is ask you to remove it.

[Guest]

you are posting pics of plants and light bulbs and dirt on the net, seriously, WHO THE FUCK CARES if ICMAG is going to use them, omg, people, wtf, WHO CARES!?

[m.steelers]

I'd rather IC "officially" own them than me, for real.

I have my own copies on a cd, buried far away from prying eyes.

It's not like I'm Ansel Adams or something....

oh........somebody needs a bonghit ^^^^

[Farmer John]

Yeah, a powerbong hit in the head :D sorry for even posting but this_is_silly. :D

[AbbieDoobie]

Whatever you post on the Internet becomes property of anybody on the Internet who is smart enough to do a right-click-Save-as...

[Kakashi420]

I don't get it, this post is 2 years old, but everybody just realized it? Suspicious to me, but it's not like my transcripts are being typed up in my posts.

[.♠.]

Odd to me, but not to him.

No big deal, the guy was not happy with the situation, so he acted upon it.

No need to have ten posts telling him or discusing about how he was silly for doing so.

He wanted to, he did it.

Keep the Peace

[Bonzo]

McKenna, i lived on that island for over a year when i was just a wee 19 years old, i lived in Napili right next door to Kapalua, unreal place to live, especialy with Honalua bay not far away, beautifull place to live. :D

peace

bonz :crazy:

[Verite]

I had a pic of mine published in Weed world magazine....and to make it more annoying others were given credit.......i made several sarcastic comments at the time. Here is the link.
http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=12913
Peace


Interesting to note your avy is a copyrighted photo by a renown dutch photographer.

Some people think a disclaimer holds more power than the law. If you do go ahead and profit from some of my photos and we'll see if it was enough to cover what the judge awards me after I prove in court the photo in your publication is mine. Assembled words are one thing, people taking publications to court over photo rights happens all the time and the court always favors the owner of the pic, especially when the publication cant prove a contract exists between the photographer and them.

[XbX]

but in the case of pics posted here wouldn't the IC MAg copyright statement be interpreted by the courts to be a contract between the poster of the pic and the owners of the site? (not that I am any legal expert and i do not want to test this in court)

[Gamera]

They have to do that and notice that it's not exclusive rights. Welcome to the grahics world. If this is enough to make someone leave then WHATever. This site is connected to a magazine and they have to do this, and people are happy when their stuff gets printed. SO every time someone wins photo of the month, they don't have to get a release signed. There's really nothing to worry about here unless you just NEED something to worry about. So hey, why don't we take this energy and grow some flowers?
no worries,
Gamera

[mybeans420]

ummm :chin:
did anyone whos complaining about this catch the whole "limited right"
and "You still retain all other rights to your works"

sheesh :rolleyes:

what about this?
"unless specific instructions otherwise are included with the posting or submission."

Well put Gamera

[Verite]

Big difference between using the photo here or taking the photo and using it to profit elsewhere.

Unfortunately, " Thats what I thought " doesnt trump the laws written on the subject.

http://www.copyright.gov/

[JackTheGrower]

Myself I do my artworks and threads for all but I want credit!

If you are making money off my efforts I want to be given credit for the work.

Who knows someone may want to pay me to produce and if they think I'm someone else I could lose income.

Not cool.


P.S. I've been through this with a much smaller web site. I found out how quick they stuck a knife in my back after I no longer produce for them.

:bashhead:


I'm kinda testing the water here now... I may stay around.

I am the man of my works.

Say when y'all (icmag) use material do y'all ( icmag) notify the author?

[20kw dreams]

Yeah, that is bullshit. Only the original owner of the material should have the right to his/her material on this or any website unless explicit permission is given.

Credit should ALWAYS be given to an artist and to not do so is pretty fascist.

Is this disclaimer in the original users agreement, digitally signed by each user when signing up for an account?

At minimum a PM should be sent to EVERY member at ICMag so they are aware of what they are signing away to.

This is also a blatant abuse of already persecuted MJ users. ICMag saying it has some kind of right to others peoples property without explicit concent is taking advantage of people who can't pursue any kind of legal recourse.

IMO, this copyright disclaimer should be rewritten.

[Babbabud]

They have to do that and notice that it's not exclusive rights. Welcome to the grahics world. If this is enough to make someone leave then WHATever. This site is connected to a magazine and they have to do this, and people are happy when their stuff gets printed. SO every time someone wins photo of the month, they don't have to get a release signed. There's really nothing to worry about here unless you just NEED something to worry about. So hey, why don't we take this energy and grow some flowers?
no worries,
Gamera


:wave:

[Suby]

What about material we quote from other sites?
We are using info copied and pasted from the web all the time...

Suby

[allorganic]

All your base are belong to us.

[Deft]

Would be nice to have a clearly defined usage of the usurped property posted in the original notice, that would be an honest thing to provide considering what people are giving up.

[Liam]

For a site basically discussing illegal things, I find it funny that they think we would respect copyright laws, or that we would expect them to.

[guineapig]

Once when i wanted to quote Jorge Cervantes on a certain subject, i e-mailed him first and asked him in person if it was ok to re-print material he had previously published in book format......

He politely responded that he, like other writers, depends on book sales for a living and said that he would rather me not re-print certain sections of his books here on ICmag......

Let me just say that i have written extensively here, especially when i first joined, and always have given credit where credit was due.......never would i steal pics or blatantly plagerize other peoples' works without first giving them credit (or, as in the case of Jorge Cervantes, contacting the author prior to posting)....

Also let me say that I BUY ALL BOOKS AND MAGAZINES RELATED TO CANNABIS......some of the major books i have even purchased two or three times over, including Cervantes, R.C. Clarke, Rosenthal, DJ Short, Soma, BOG, etc....I urge you to support all canna-businesses out there, so that this industry can thrive financially in the face of the nazi-like propaganda that seeks to demonize this medicine and industrial fiber.....

So hopefully this will help someone somewhere out there.....

:ying: kind regards from a guineapig :ying:

[Guest]

I would like to quote some cave man long dead..."ugh". You see the copy rights have gone public on that one.

[DocLeaf]

Many photos were already duplicated onto other internet forums; in newspapers, magazines, journals, on flyers, cup posters, and download videos, either prior to or after them being uploaded here at ICMag.

The subject of copyright on pot plants is as ever quite a silly one :canabis:

[Doobieduck]

The subject of copyright on pot plants is as ever quite a silly one :canabis:
Doc....I don't see your point here? My images of marijuana are legally produced and are also legal to print and sell. I live in the USA. My images are copyright to me. The copyright belongs to the artist unless released to another. So...what is your point? DD

http://www.icmag.com/gallery/data/500/708404-18-08-Menage-A-Blue-finish-1135M.JPG (http://www.icmag.com/gallery/data/500/708404-18-08-Menage-A-Blue-finish-1135M.JPG)

[DocLeaf]

My point is that most of the people using these forums do so under the understanding that the images they upload, once uploaded, no-longer belong to them. Rather they now belong to the online cannabis community,,, and the patrons that have kindly supported the facility of making these images available online,, for the general public to view.

We personally respect facilities like ICMag / Gypsy for this. They (and others) house the images that I n I don't want sitting about on a computer or disk for the pigs to spunk on. My own gallery is used as a constant source of information on the phyllotaxy of cannabis anatomy (bud structure),, with out which I'd forget so much of what we were growing/smoking last year, and now the year gone. :canabis:

DocLeaf has duplicated images all over the place. So what? If a company or the next company wants to source them as reference, then that's really up to them,, i n i nah give a f**k about these things... DocLeaf will always know the conditions beneath which the image was fixed,,, so long as none of them comes back at us with bs claiming that we can't post our own photos someplace else again,,, lol Then,, what's the problem?

However. The day that ANYONE republishes ANY images from fritillary seed,, without owner consent,, then fritillary seed will - first seek "royalties", a process of litigation would soon follow,, and we'd imagine someones head would roll... lol haha :biglaugh: Not really we'd probably just take the shop windows off until a donation to a local blind charity or something was made ,, and trust I's know plenty window fitters,, wood and UPVC :biglaugh:

Getting back to reality,,, the logistics in pursuing recompense from an online pseudonym are in fact so slim... that it is silly that this subject is even being debated here. This thread is in place as a legal requirement by ICMag, thought up by a smart-ass accountant / lawyer / type person,, and actually holds very little in the way of legal status in a real court of law... as with all so called cannabis copyright laws,, it's a chimera based on a set of twisted-up laws. In the most extreme case some jumped up rich kid is going to try sue ICMag,, and fail... lol

Try not to get too hooked up on it buddy,, :canabis:

This is what we is saying :wink:

"If you throw a dog a bone, you don't want to know how good it tastes..." : Brick-top


Peace out
Erb Roots n All

DLeaf :joint:

Edit: p.s. please take what we say in jest,, true rascal at heart,, we're just emphasising the madness involved in litigation :D

[Doobieduck]

Doc I understand fully what this thread is about, who has the copyright etc. I also use small enough resolution images it would be hard for anyone to re-produce them with any quality in mind...but they will try and they will use them. My post was regarding your statement "The subject of copyright on pot plants is as ever quite a silly one" I'm sure if someone could prove they created a strain they also would have the copyright on it just as they do in the entire flower industry. As the plant becomes more legal, such as my images of it are now, we may see copyrights on strains as well...........no problems freind....DD.

[DocLeaf]

Peace doobieduck :friends:

This is actually a fascinating topic. It raises as many questions as answers,, which is always critical,,, forward thinking stuff. :canabis:

[hoosierdaddy]

I think I missed the part about ICMag gaining ownership of any of my material as a condition to membership....

I also think that someone is overstepping their bounds, or at the very least doesn't have a clear understanding of how copyrite laws actually work.

Skip's post isn't worth much. Simply another thread on a message board.

[Guest]

So if you are concerned about your photos keep the resolution low as you can.

[FOE20]

hate to say it but God gave us the canna plant...we dont own shit...
You write a Song?...a Book?....well it better be all original and then you can claim copy rights..the Net is a huge open forum...once you post..your owned..
Pics are 1 in a billion...good luk...I get to enjoy the herb itself..I coud care less about a image and actually I post images to Share them with everyone..thus the point of a open Public forum..heheh..
FOE20

[PeavillePride]

Has anyone had a problem or any of there photos used or anything by IC since the beginning of IC?No.I dont think there will be either ,but either way if ya dont trust youre photos here,then dont post or use the low res like someone said.Theres no probs from IC,but HighTimes took a pic from here n posted it without permission in there Rag once :spank: ..IC can have ALL my pix,im not using them to make money or use in a mag or anything,so who cares. There not gonna use them either,imo.
http://www.icmag.com/gallery/data/500/25146DSCF0717-thumb.JPG (http://www.icmag.com/gallery/data/500/25146DSCF0717.JPG)

[Rood Spook]

"Getting back to reality,,, the logistics in pursuing recompense from an online pseudonym are in fact so slim... that it is silly that this subject is even being debated here."

Exactly......anyone worried about pictures is a boob :wave:

[tokinjoe]

Hey guys, take a minute to look at all the sigs here, especially the ones of hollywood stars, etc. The funny thing is some of you that use pirated pictures for cigs are shaming ICMag for doing the same thing....Question, of all that are bitching about their "copyrighted" pictures on here, how many REALLY got a copyright on pictures of illegal plants that they are growing? Of all of the things I have to worry about on a daily basis ICMag posting a picuture I put on the INTERNET of something I grew has GOT to rank last. Dead last. I guess some folks just have nothing better to do. Want to really show your frustration here? Delete your account. I would hate to see that though. All of this incessant whining makes for a really good read.

[OgreSeeker]

Hey guys, take a minute to look at all the sigs here, especially the ones of hollywood stars, etc. The funny thing is some of you that use pirated pictures for cigs are shaming ICMag for doing the same thing....Question, of all that are bitching about their "copyrighted" pictures on here, how many REALLY got a copyright on pictures of illegal plants that they are growing? Of all of the things I have to worry about on a daily basis ICMag posting a picuture I put on the INTERNET of something I grew has GOT to rank last. Dead last. I guess some folks just have nothing better to do. Want to really show your frustration here? Delete your account. I would hate to see that though. All of this incessant whining makes for a really good read.


I don't even think it's about that, man. It's all about ownership. These are MY pics and I'm uploading them here to help grow the site and contribute to other fellow growers.
Now, not only does GN want the business that is driven by our photos and info but he wants to actually own the pics. I can see where these people are coming from.
Personally, I could give a shit less (so long as he puts my IC handle at the bottom of said published pic hehehe) :rasta:

[Skip]

All you ppl have to do, is what I do. I put my sig in any pic I feel has value. And yes, I always retain the original, hi-rez, uncropped, uncorrected image as proof of copyright.

If I post an image on a website, I give a LIMITED COPYRIGHT (please learn what that means b4 you even reply), to that site to do what it chooses with it, within copyright law, and within it's own business domain.

If you don't want to assign a LIMITED COPYRIGHT, then don't post it, cause then it is within the website & business' legal right to do what it wants (except sell it or allow another entity to use it - that is the limitation).

For instance, if I see a nice image in a gallery, I may post it on the front page of the site too. The owner has already given us permission to use it on icmag, so there is no copyright violation. (the fact of the matter is, the owner of the tricome pic currently on the page was notified and permission was given to place it there). I didn't have to do that, but I did it out of courtesy.

And anyone who had their images placed in IC Mag itself (the physical magazine), gladly allowed the use of their images, as I recall...

You can argue all you want out of ignorance, but if you research copyright law you will discover you're wasting your time...

Unless you SELL or GIVE AWAY your original copyright (you'd need to provide a signed document to do that), NOBODY CAN EVER TAKE IT FROM YOU. That is the bottom line, so the idea of us STEALING your copyright is ludicrious.

The fact of the matter is if you post an image here first, you've proven your copyright, and this site will protect it for you! By publishing your work on icmag, it becomes copyrighted (by you) for all the public to see. However if you delete your images here then you may have a harder time later proving copyright (you'll be on your own to defend it).

[randude101]

These practices by ICmag are not any different than any other web site like this. If it wasn't the case they would not be able to afford the liability to even let you post your own photo.

However, when someone post someone else's work you are getting into a can of worms.

If you care about it put a watermark on it.

[Skip]

Anyone who has posted an original image of theirs here, that gets copied and posted elsewhere (for profit or not), can ask an admin (like me) to help enforce their copyright.

We will send the image owner an email verifying the date and time the image was posted on icmag.com and by whom (we can provide username & email addy at your request). We can also contact whomever posted the image without your consent and ask that it be removed or that you be compensated. We can also enter into legal proceedings if warranted because we too have a limited copyright and can aid your defense.

Then the real owner will prevail unless someone else can prove an earlier publication date somewhere.

But if you have your original unretouched hi-rez image, you really don't need us, as you have sufficient proof to press your case.

If ppl post an image here that is not theirs, without the author's permission, we will take it down if requested by the copyright holder. Doing that a lot will get you banned as it is illegal. I've had instances when non-copyright holders have asked for stuff to be removed claiming it was copyrighted material and unless they can prove they own the copyright, I won't do a thing.

One last thing. If you're planning on hiring a lawyer, remember, you won't see a penny unless someone has actually made a profit from your work. And then what you get is usually limited to the proven losses as a result of the copyright violation. So you'd have to prove that you lost money. Not an easy thing to do unless you are a professional photographer who makes money from their pix.

Again, you need only add a statement with any image or text you post saying Copyright So-and-So, all reproduction rights reserved. That would prohibit icmag and others from using that image anywhere else than where you posted it. Put it in your sig and we will honor it for everything you post here. (but don't enter any photo contests cause we won't use your work if we can't use it elsewhere within icmag's business).

[Open Eyes]

Have any of you seriously read an EULA of a Microsoft Product? If you did you would not use it but most of you do it without even reading it yet there are no problems there.

[JackTheGrower]

Cool! I don't mind doing quality for everyone, that's the way to grow as a Gardener but, the idea that mine gets published for profit and I get no credit is absolutely wrong.

The very minimum is that the Gods of Karma will get ya!

Also if anyone see's something from here published drop the poster a note if you can!

We can't be everywhere all the time!


Jack

[Doobieduck]

Also if anyone see's something from here published drop the poster a note if you can! We can't be everywhere all the time!


JackThanks Skip for posting your above clarification and Jack thank you for reminding our friends to watch out for us. I have found many of my images all over the internet, one only has to Google Doobieduck to see the many pages of them, but fortunately I have never found any being sold or reproduced for sale. I did have a copyright case on eBay where an artist was offering a painting that was almost an exact copy of one of my images. I contacted eBay with the original image and her auction was ended within 24 hours. DD

[JackTheGrower]

Cool..

:yeahthats