Way to sweepingly generalize something. I had to use copyright laws when I was a pro track photographer. I found out that one of the drivers owned a printing shop. He was telling people to purchase one photo from me at my price and then turning around, scanning it in, and re-printing them for the customers at a lower price. Same exact work, so you can't argue about the quality. This fuck was also taking my images and using them in advertising which was also a copyright violation. This isn't about who took the better picture as I was the person behind the camera. It's about protecting work, that in my case involved time and actual sweat each and every weekend I was out in the sun. But it seems the majority of people in this thread think that he was justified in stealing MY work.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

Do people buy your photos decades after you take them? No?

So reasonable copyright terms like 10 or 15 years should be totally fine with you. Unless you are just emotional about it and ranting online.

[–] Glitchington@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

When working at a print shop, we checked for copyright coverage all the time, and even refused orders over it. Watermarking the corner of your images is a good start. You can also make sure your web images are low resolution to prevent reprinting. 300ppi (pixels per inch) at scale is required for printing. Though the real kicker is, YOU are responsible for protecting your copyright, and you probably should have hired a lawyer.

[–] Trail@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I think you gotta keep it mind that, like reddit, a majority of the people here should be assumed to be teens or so.

[–] favrion@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago

Hey, just here to let you know that I 100% agree with you. You're being attacked for no reason.