just so nobody gets their panties in a bunch I will give credit to www.housequake.com in my example....(well pic changed now so )








okay if I'm not mistaken the address on it says photobucket (within the url) so why does hq claim it?it's a spectacular pic indeed but are we using from hq's bandwidth when viewing it? why are some people like vashti/purplehousegallery site so open to sharing prince pics and some others so damn anal for the sake of recognition ? Is it really that big of a deal that only hardcore fans would go to various hardcore fan sites seeking images of the man but want to limit each other from who posted/shared a simple image? also are some of these people really giving credit to the photographers as they mentioned they do or am I seeing pics from calenders ,mags, etc with no credit given and there website in the bottom right and corner... it's as if they just throw it on there as soon as they can so if any of us so called whiners (as we've been described by some of them) see it and want to share it they had it first. this ain't a competition unless the thread reads rare pic challenge so quit trippin everybody!!!! HOW LAME TO SNATCH UP OTHER POSTED IMAGES AND SHOW THEM ON YOUR SITE YET WHEN WE FORGET TO GIVE SOME OF YOU FULL CREDIT YOU TAKE THE IMAGE OFF OF THE WEB OUT OF SPITE. thank goodness the foolish never considered that most of us hardcore heads are on all of these sites and know damn well that if someone posts it we can just copy it and save it for later... remember also that if a watercolor print of a sites name is removed by peeps from another site it's no different than the photographer who really took the pic not getting the visible credit!!!! if you took a pic as a photographer would you trip on people showing your work with their logo on it , even if they didn't pay you one red cent or a phonecall even....
[This message was edited Sun May 9 13:12:46 2004 by GaylordFauker]
[This message was edited Sun May 9 13:14:19 2004 by GaylordFauker]

i agree...im lost as to why a website would imply copywrite ownership like that...and then not give credit to the actual photographer..

and what the fuck was prince thinking when he did that to his blouse?

sosgemini said:

He was just reading my mind at the time.

Whats the problem folks?

Ofcourse you can show the pics here, but please host them yourself because, I and also some other members (frequent pic posters) of Housequake.com pay for our photobucket account so that everyone can see the pics. (Yes you will have to pay when it exceeds the traffic exceeds certain ammount.).

Second, we are not claiming the copyright of the pic at all (hence the missing copyright sign on the picture), furthermore we always try to add the name of the photographer of the picture to the thread. But most of the people don't care less and doesn't copy that part.

One of the reasons why we add a small logo on the bottom corner, is that the most of the people simply don't care who is doing the work, and this way the Housequake members gets some recoginition. Because some pics really takes effort to get online properly. Housequake.com is a tight & friendly club, and we simply do stuff for each other on HQ.

So be a good sport, and please host the picture scanned by Parade (Housequake moderator) yourself.

-
[This message was edited Sun May 9 11:25:41 2004 by housequake]

sosgemini said:

Maybe he was hungry that day.

U know, it's a busy life 4 a supa-staaah - recording, jamming, doing his hair and make-up, deciding what 2 wear, standing around looking 2 kool 4 school etc. It's takes a toll on a man u know.

----
[This message was edited Sun May 9 11:42:49 2004 by housequake]
[This message was edited Sun May 9 11:44:02 2004 by housequake]

One of the reasons to post a logo on the pic is to prevent doing from what your doing: hotlinking. It really sucks if other people are eating up your bandwidth. And yes I have a photobucket account, because that is the cheapest. That doesn't mean that the bandwidth can't be exceeded.

Besides, like I said before, there is no obligation to look at the scans I post. So if you are annoyed by them (with the little logo) so much, just don't look at the threads I start at housequake.com. There are plenty of other picture sites: princefams.com, shake princefam site and purple house.


Some comments on your comments:


Actually if you check my posts you should know that I always give credit when I know where the pic comes from or who took it. When they come from my scrapbook (like this one) most of the time I don't know that


Recently Bananacologne and I started the scan challenge here. Strangely enough there wasn''t a single scan posted (besides the ones posted by BC and me). And if you read that thread you should know that I was 'prepared' to skip the logos. So it is really up to you.



Ridiculous. This comes from a magazine from the nineties I think. That is 14 years ago. Plenty of time for you to scan it before I did on May 8, 2004


Then at least you wouldn't be using my bandwidth


I think you're even worse than me. I mean I was so bad to post this scan on HQ, but you even spread it in the Prince community.

Finally I get a bit sick of the people whining about our so called whining.
1. You don't need to look at the pics. You don't even have to visit Housequake.
2. Go and scan some stuff yourself
3. And stop hotlinking!
4. People that appreciate the scans visit HQ themselves, so there is no need to repost the pics here.


And for GaylordFauker: If you like the pic so much, it would be nice to post a simple thank you on HQ.

(BTW I know there are enough orgers who appreciate the scanned pics on HQ and you know who you are. For those: just forget the stuff I posted here)

housequake said:

problem? wheres the problem? heheheh

this thread is the first time ive ever saw pictures from your site...for me, this subject is more about artist rights.... i dont think a person should have any right of recognition simply for scanning and hosting a picture on the internet.....

by putting your website's name and or logo over a picture (without the original publishers permission) can be percieved as a claiming of ownership.....even without the lil copywrite logo....

now, if you own these pictures then you have all the right in the world to slap a "housequake.com" over the pics but beyond that...

dothejump said:

That's 101% true - those threads sank quicker than clothes in2 Winnona Ryder's 'shopping' bags. Went down faster than the Titanic. Went down faster than even me or Supa could. Went down faster than George Michael in a Police precinct washroom. Went down quicker than Britney Spears career. Went... (ok, I think they've got it...)

Even offered up a prize, but not one Org scanned pic was posted. Not one!
[This message was edited Sun May 9 12:00:14 2004 by bananacologne]

sosgemini said:

-=--
[This message was edited Sun May 9 12:02:52 2004 by housequake]

housequake said:

....im just sharing my opinion.....gee..i do find it "telling" that that was the only responce you were able to muster...


[This message was edited Sun May 9 12:07:39 2004 by sosgemini]

sosgemini said:

Why is no one ever talking about copyright when a complete article from a newspaper is copied? Or when someones post is quoted? Is it allowed to have a forum called NPGMusicclub? Can you have a radio station called girlbros radio when I'm pretty sure Girlbros is a registered trademark/name?
[This message was edited Sun May 9 12:10:22 2004 by dothejump]
[This message was edited Sun May 9 12:10:45 2004 by dothejump]

sosgemini said:

Sosgemini, there has been thousands of threads here on Prince.org with Housequake.com pictures. Honest. Ask Dansa or Ben. Very ackward you don't know. Nevertheless, my Housequake.com moderator Marika is still paying traffic for the image posted in this thread. Please do something about that if you can. If you recall we had some sort of agreement?

Oh lawd...

The roof is on fire

I'm out of here. You are all welcome at Housequake. But skip the photography forum if you get frustrated by some little logos at the bottom corner

dothejump said:

ahhh....so glad you mention girlbros....cause i got permission from the wendyandlisa camp to use the name..*and* i pay royalties to all the songs that are featured on my show.....TA-DA!!!!and while i have spent $500 bucks a year to run the show (in addition to an hour each day programming the playlist and hours and hours uploading tracks onto the server) i would never tag the tracks with my name just because of the work put into it....

and all news articles i copy and post include source information *and* a link that information....



all i have control over is my own actions..

housequake said:

i cant..i dont moderate this forum...but ill give the team a heads up..

and im not responding as a moderator...im just waxing my opinion...i dont hang out much in this forum so that would explain why i've never seen your hosted pictures...

I still don't understand why HQ doesn't take the effort to copyproof their photos, if people posting their photos elsewhere is such a horrible indignity to them. Check out www.jerriblank.com - try right clicking on a picture. You get called "Dickalicious", but that's about all you get. So why not do that? Or do the HQ folks enjoy caterwauling every time someone swipes a pic and posts it on the Org? When people post HQ pics to the NPGMC forums (and YES, I've seen it done several times), is there the same uproar on THAT site from the HQ folks? I'm just curious. It seems like there are solutions, but it also seems that choices are being made that have little to do with solutions and more to do with ego and a sense of validation.

Just sayin'.

I am outta here, i will ask my Housequake.com moderator to remove that picture from this thread.

Anxiety said:

hey, i got dickalicioused...

not to mention i think this is a policy discussion better suited for aaron and ben, rather than to have the HQ proprietors complaining in org open forums. it's just bad form. like i said, there's coming to a solution and there's bitching about problems. one gets taken seriously, one doesn't. guess which is which?

bananacologne said:

well some of us are not as advanced as you super computer savy wizards but I still got some juicy pics so one day when I don't have to come to bungles house to just post and can actually get my scan on I can maybe win the prize!

Anxiety said:

we gotta be able to discuss it in an open Prince forum... this place is ideal cuz we can say more than any other site with out offending...

Anxiety said:

that's just a javascript on the page disabling the right click. Its not embedded in the image. And it's really easy to bypass that, just save the page to your hard drive and it will save all the images right along with it. Also, you can simply just hit "view source" from the toolbar, and scroll through the source to find the address to the image.

dothejump said:

I thouht I said the pic was spectacular and credited hq as well but if that's not enuff thanx my friend I will get your slippers and offer a back rub next time. thanx for breakin it down for me too! no matter what I still love you and my good buddy nana!!! sorry if I got under your skin.

housequake said:

don't bother, you can have that pic...

It's really not a back-breaking effort to give someone credit. There is some time and money involved in scanning, croping, color-correcting, and preparing images for the web, as well as hosting them. Not to mention hunting the pics down in the first place.

When you spend alot of time doin stuff like this, it can be a bit annoying to see someone nonchalantly leech it.

PEJ said:

i'm not saying that we can't talk about it - i'm just saying that the folks who run HQ should REALLY be addressing their concerns with ben if they really want to iron out actual solutions and changes. we can talk about it in theory all we want, the more the merrier.