panthermick
Ross Lambert
visit Hockey Net UK for all the latest hockey news results fixtures stats photo's & much more
Posts: 1,345
|
Post by panthermick on Sept 27, 2006 8:15:04 GMT
Just uploaded a few pics of the boys from the 6-5 OT win 23/09/2006 Game.
follow link below & look in
Pics of the week Section
enjoy
|
|
|
Post by charlish2099 on Sept 27, 2006 14:16:49 GMT
has anyone else noticed edinburgh had the bmi elite league badge on there shirts?
|
|
|
Post by dad on Sept 27, 2006 14:43:47 GMT
Mick, I would be very cautious if i was you. LINK
|
|
|
Post by ted on Sept 27, 2006 16:59:14 GMT
Thought that was just at the NIC?
|
|
|
Post by Rob #12 on Sept 27, 2006 20:38:16 GMT
No, from the convo I had with Panthers, it is any EIHL player, the league retain the rights to them.
Apparently gonna come down hard too. That's why they have been taken off Panthers Online.
|
|
|
Post by Alf Garnett on Sept 27, 2006 20:51:15 GMT
No, from the convo I had with Panthers, it is any EIHL player, the league retain the rights to them. Apparently gonna come down hard too. That's why they have been taken off Panthers Online. From what we understand you can have pictures for personal use, but nothing else. The problems arise when the pictures are broadcast and copyright issues then come into play. Caution is advised, Mick and everyone has been forewarned in the announcement at the top of each page.
|
|
Milkman™
Les Strongman
Always Delivers
Posts: 5,300
|
Post by Milkman™ on Sept 27, 2006 21:39:35 GMT
No, from the convo I had with Panthers, it is any EIHL player, the league retain the rights to them. Apparently gonna come down hard too. That's why they have been taken off Panthers Online. Image rights, that makes me chuckle so much. And the Panthers/League bosses wonder why no pros will come cover the games
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Sept 27, 2006 22:10:18 GMT
No, from the convo I had with Panthers, it is any EIHL player, the league retain the rights to them. Apparently gonna come down hard too. That's why they have been taken off Panthers Online. Image rights, that makes me chuckle so much. And the Panthers/League bosses wonder why no pros will come cover the games What - none? Dave Page isn't a "pro"? The guy who did the Edinburgh photos on Saturday isn't a "pro"? Etc etc? I see the point you're making, and can even agree with it a fair bit - but I think you are wildly exaggerating...
|
|
|
Post by texpef on Sept 27, 2006 22:14:07 GMT
dont think either was before shaggy and as chris had said they cant rely on hockey money to make a living...
|
|
Milkman™
Les Strongman
Always Delivers
Posts: 5,300
|
Post by Milkman™ on Sept 27, 2006 22:14:39 GMT
Image rights, that makes me chuckle so much. And the Panthers/League bosses wonder why no pros will come cover the games What - none? Dave Page isn't a "pro"? The guy who did the Edinburgh photos on Saturday isn't a "pro"? Etc etc? I see the point you're making, and can even agree with it a fair bit - but I think you are wildly exaggerating... Pro as in sports photographers who earn their living doing just that And on the exaggerate thing - if this is not the case then where can a sports editor see these pictures on the night they are taken, so he can get them in his publication. I can take photos at a football game that are on the agencies website within 20 seconds of been taken, thats professional.
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Sept 27, 2006 22:20:13 GMT
What - none? Dave Page isn't a "pro"? The guy who did the Edinburgh photos on Saturday isn't a "pro"? Etc etc? I see the point you're making, and can even agree with it a fair bit - but I think you are wildly exaggerating... Pro as in sports photographers who earn their living doing just that And on the exaggerate thing - if this is not the case then where can a sports editor see these pictures on the night they are taken, so he can get them in his publication. I can take photos at a football game that are on the agencies website within 20 seconds of been taken, thats professional. www.sports-media-partnership.com/
|
|
Milkman™
Les Strongman
Always Delivers
Posts: 5,300
|
Post by Milkman™ on Sept 27, 2006 22:24:56 GMT
Pro as in sports photographers who earn their living doing just that And on the exaggerate thing - if this is not the case then where can a sports editor see these pictures on the night they are taken, so he can get them in his publication. I can take photos at a football game that are on the agencies website within 20 seconds of been taken, thats professional. www.sports-media-partnership.com/ Dave Im not slagging anyone here but those are snapshots Sorry to the photographer, but they would not be published Compare them with one i took many years ago (sorry quick google search brought this up), there is a massive difference, mine is in focus, the white balance is perfect and the compositon is a million miles away from the ones you highlighted.
|
|
MP
Paul Adey
Hail hurts and rain is cold. Summer in the mountains
Posts: 6,811
|
Post by MP on Sept 27, 2006 23:30:52 GMT
No, from the convo I had with Panthers, it is any EIHL player, the league retain the rights to them. Apparently gonna come down hard too. That's why they have been taken off Panthers Online. Something of a grey area. What constitutes "broadcasting" on the internet? Having a collection of photos on a personal web site which may be viewed by cyber visitors is little different from showing an album of photographic prints to people who call at your house. If there is no commercial activity on the site, and especially if the quality of the pictures is below the professional level, then what is the problem? The Cage admin team discussed the matter in the wake of Panthers recent statement. To be on the safe side, we decided that as a general rule, we won't permit hockey photos to be displayed directly on the Cage - a sad state of affairs and a poor reflection on those who run the league. Effectively, that means not using the "img" command, even though the images are not hosted by the Cage. However, I have no qualms about links being posted on the Cage to sites that contain hockey photos. As far as I'm aware there are no regulations regarding links on websites and nor should there be. If Panthers or the League have any problems with individuals having hockey pictures on their personal websites then they should take up the matter with them directly. Links to external websites is a concept that is still poorly understood in some circles - including some business and legal sectors. This whole episode is rather sad. We are living in an age where where image capture and transmission (for personal, non-commercial use) is rapidly becoming an everyday normality and commercial organisations need to come to terms with that reality.
|
|
Milkman™
Les Strongman
Always Delivers
Posts: 5,300
|
Post by Milkman™ on Sept 27, 2006 23:43:15 GMT
No, from the convo I had with Panthers, it is any EIHL player, the league retain the rights to them. Apparently gonna come down hard too. That's why they have been taken off Panthers Online. Something of a grey area. What constitutes "broadcasting" on the internet? Having a collection of photos on a personal web site which may be viewed by cyber visitors is little different from showing an album of photographic prints to people who call at your house. If there is no commercial activity on the site, and especially if the quality of the pictures is below the professional level, then what is the problem? The Cage admin team discussed the matter in the wake of Panthers recent statement. To be on the safe side, we decided that as a general rule, we won't permit hockey photos to be displayed directly on the Cage - a sad state of affairs and a poor reflection on those who run the league. Effectively, that means not using the "img" command, even though the images are not hosted by the Cage. However, I have no qualms about links being posted on the Cage to sites that contain hockey photos. As far as I'm aware there are no regulations regarding links on websites and nor should there be. If Panthers or the League have any problems with individuals having hockey pictures on their personal websites then they should take up the matter with them directly. Links to external websites is a concept that is still poorly understood in some circles - including some business and legal sectors. This whole episode is rather sad. We are living in an age where where image capture and transmission (for personal, non-commercial use) is rapidly becoming an everyday normality and commercial organisations need to come to terms with that reality. MP everyone now is a potential PJ (photo-journalist), as long as no one is profiting from selling the images (especially ones i have taken I see no problem whatsoever However someone using an image of mine without first seeking permission is theft (pure and simple), and that is the attitude that the Panthers and league are taking on this. As you say, sad really in a sport that needs all the coverage it can get.
|
|
MP
Paul Adey
Hail hurts and rain is cold. Summer in the mountains
Posts: 6,811
|
Post by MP on Sept 27, 2006 23:57:13 GMT
However someone using an image of mine without first seeking permission is theft (pure and simple), and that is the attitude that the Panthers and league are taking on this. That's fair enough - if you took the image then indeed it would theft for someone else to display it without permission. However, posting a link to the picture and acknowledging the credit doesn't raise any problems. But when people display their own images, for no commercial gain, then the whole issue seems rather pointless. Amen to that Chris, amen to that.
|
|
Milkman™
Les Strongman
Always Delivers
Posts: 5,300
|
Post by Milkman™ on Sept 28, 2006 0:15:05 GMT
If anyone is bored
This pretty much sums up image rights and media stuff in football
The bit about fixture lists is interesting
UK Football Rights FAQ
Q. Why are there no fixture lists on fansites? A. Fixture lists are the exclusive intellectual property of the Football League, and are licensed by them for use by 3rd parties. For someone to put just their teams fixtures on a site would cost £258.00 per season. Not surprisingly few fans are prepared to pay for information which really should be public domain and free.
Q. What about pictures, there are very few of those either, particularly recent ones.. why is that? A. All mid-game ‘action shots’ are the property of the Football League and/or Sky TV. It is illegal for someone to show them on a website without permission. I myself, did try to get permission but they simply do not give out material in this way. Headshots of the players in team strip are the property of the Club itself and can be shown if they give permission. Few clubs have given permission to fansites for this.
Q. This is all a bit heavy isn’t it? A. Tell me about it. I guess it is just a symptom of the radically commercial state of the game today that all elements of the ‘product’ that is Football are owned by someone, usually exclusively, and usually with the sole aim of generating revenue from it. Sky TV have, after all, pumped huge piles of cash into it, so expect to own all rights to all of the coverage.
Recently the Premier and Football Leagues created a Limited Company called simply ‘Football DataCo Ltd’. This Company has the task of policing the media, and in particular the Internet. They have a ‘compliance unit’ which reviews websites and issues warnings to those sites that are infringing the many licensing agreements that bind football material, pictures, video, sound, trademarks and so on.
In 2003 alone the Compliance Unit allegedly closed down in excess of 250 fansites. Think about that for a moment.
So.. on many sites now you will not find any photographs of the team, limited or old headshots, player names and shirt numbers are also licensed - although narrative content such as this FAQ can include them - so no team lists as such. You will also find that there are no Club Crests (trademarked by the Club), no images of the stadium, absolutely no video or audio content, and no live data (so goal flashes or a live updating league table are out of the question).
Fansites are allowed to show the league table though. Lucky old us.. Okay, here is some info sent to me, or related on the phone by various folk including the Commercial Director at CCFC, the General Manager at Football DataCo Ltd (who has since moved on), the Photographic license guy at the Football League and a few other journalists and media folk.
A few years ago - the Premiership and the Football League formed a jointly owned Limited Company called ‘Football Data Company Ltd’, based in Connaught Place in London and usually referred to as ‘Football DataCo’. This Company is responsible for protecting the rights to the various aspects of media coverage for football in England and Wales and has a fair amount of cash behind it.
This Company has something they call the Compliance Unit, which amongst other things reviews websites for breaches of licensing, and where necessary contacts the site owners and ISPs to make changes or close the site down under threat of legal action. Few ISPs will stand against this, and in fact intellectual property theft is often in the ISP T&C so they can shut your site with little or no warning and no refund.
Throughout the 4th Quarter of 2002, an extraordinary 182 Football related websites were closed, and over 300 warnings issued. In October 2002 alone, the Compliance Unit closed down 70 Fansites.Here then are the rules and restrictions on football websites.
Fixture Lists Fixture Lists are owned and licensed by the League. Official Club sites can obviously show fixtures for themselves (but not other clubs) for free - everyone else must apply for and pay to license the data from the League. If you are the officially recognised Fanzine website, and can get the Club to write a letter to that effect - the cost to license Fixtures is just 1 Uk Pound per Season. Each Club can only nominate a single site as such. For whatever reason, virtually no Premiership or First Division Clubs have chosen to nominate an Official Fansite.
If not, the cost is 258 UK Pounds per season - for each team whos fixtures you wish to show. To show the entire 1st Division fixtures it would therefore cost 24 x 258 = 6,192 pounds plus VAT. There are discounts available if you do buy all of them but it is still going to cost you a small fortune.
The official fanzine site can pay just 24 quid for the lot - so it really is worthwhile to get the Clubs recognitiion, but as I said - this is very hard to get in practice and your independence in terms of being critical about the club has gone.
The League Table The League Table itself is considered public domain and can be shown. There may be issues if you wished to show a live updating table (as Sky do on the last day of the season), as this may be considered as ‘live data’ and is therefore the property of Sky TV.
A static Table, that is updated after 5.00pm each Saturday is fine.
Match Results are considered to be public domain and can be shown. As with the League Table, you cannot show Live Goal Flashes, as this is ‘live data’ and owned by Sky TV.
Use of the Official Logo and other Trademarked Items You can display the Nationwide logo on pages that show the League Table or Results. You cannot show the Football League logo without their permission, which they seldom give. At the very least they will wish to review the site contents in full - and will remove permission should they ever notice anything that they are not happy with. The League have signed a deal with Premium TV who have paid a lot of money to be the Official League site.
You cannot show the Club Crest or derivations thereof - as this is a registered trademark. Neither can you show any trademarked Club logo or its trademarked name. If you wish to show these, you must apply in writing to the League itself, though I have been told that it is very unlikely that they would ever grant this without written controls over usage and content on the site.
Photographic Images As Coventry fan Jonny Barton found, Photography within the Stadium is strictly prohibited. Media coverage of game action is licensed by Sky TV, who can withdraw coverage (and therefore pay no TV money) to any Club that allows action coverage by any 3rd Party. Clubs are therefore extremely touchy on this point, and there have been numerous incidents during the 2002/03 Season where fans have been ejected for taking still/video images during a game.
All action photography is the property of the League. Only approved websites are allowed to apply for permission to use action shots, and approved sites are those that have agreements in place with the League (such as the Newspaper sites who source through PA News or Ananova in Leeds). Fansites are not allowed to show any action shots.
Head shots of players in the Coventry kit belong to the Club, and only the Club can give permission for a fansite to use them. If the player or his agent object, then the pictures will have to be removed regardless of the Clubs permission. Clubs very rarely give this permission however - although the odd Charity site for example have managed it where the Player is involved in the worthy cause.
Shots of players in International strip (live action or not) belong to the International federation of the Country they play for, and cannot be used without their permission. In the case of England it would be the FA.
Shots of players playing in a European competition (not likely for Coventry but still), belong to UEFA, and cannot be used without their permission.
The only way you can take photographs inside the Ground, is to apply for a League Photographic License - and then with this License to apply to the Club to be allowed into the Press Area. To qualify so that you are even able to apply for a Photographic License you must have had 15 Paid Photgraphic images (30 if you want a Premiership license), published in National or Regional newspapers, within the last Year.
These images could be of Sunday League matches for the local Freesheet for example, but it must be Paid work - and you must be able to produce evidence if asked.
In the event that you have a Photographic License, and you have succeeded in getting permission from the Club (no mean feat, many clubs are heavily over-subscribed for the press area), to enter the Ground with a Camera, then you are finally free to take pictures. Sadly, however - you still cannot use these images on a website, of any kind, at all. All you can do is to sell the Images to an approved Site such as Ananova or The Guardian for use on their site.
Team Sheets / Squad Lists Player names and shirt numbers are under database license by the League who administers them for the Clubs. You cannot therefore show a squad list of Player Names and Shirt Numbers without League Permission. You can only use Player Names in a narrative or editorial context such as a match review or news item.
Live Coverage Live match coverage, of any kind, is not allowed. No Audio streams from a website for example, or live textual coverage are allowed. Strictly speaking, narrating the match, live, via mobile phone from the ground or from your seat in front of the PC, to a 3rd Party, is infringing SKY TVs exclusive broadcast rights and is therefore illegal.
Moving images, even animated GIFs of match action are not allowed. Video files of live action are also not allowed without the written permission of the broadcaster and the Club.
Other Points of Interest
* Websites are now liable under Libel Laws, and there have been recent actions against individuals who have written libellous material. Under certain circumstances you can get away with satirical narrative, but steer clear of anything involving ongoing litigation - so do not take the wee wee out of Player X being in court for drunk driving. Several websites fell foul of this during the infamous Leeds players court case and were closed down. * WAP Coverage is covered by a separate agreement, and is therefore licensed. You cannot have a WAP website showing Football media without permission. * No website Betting without a betting license. * The selling or auctioning of protected Football material, either directly or indirectly on the website will result in legal action. Used footy shirts are okay so long as they are genuine and have been legally obtained, but your homemade T-shirts of some naked girl with the Club Crest across her chest - definitely not allowed. * Fantasy Football games, where real Player/Club/League Names are used are not allowed, unless you first obtain all the necessary licensing. You cannot use the phrase ‘Fantasy Football’ either, as this is owned.
I think that just about covers it. As an aside, much of the licensing of live action is worded to protect ‘digital and broadcast’ rights, so you could legitimately set up an Easel, paint a watercolour of a goal incident, and stick this on a website. I think you’d just about get away with this.
|
|
MP
Paul Adey
Hail hurts and rain is cold. Summer in the mountains
Posts: 6,811
|
Post by MP on Sept 28, 2006 0:40:35 GMT
All of which goes a fair way to explaining why I gave up on football years ago - it stopped being a sport and the fun went out of it. At the top level it's a business pure and simple. Just a shame they want to bite the hand that feeds them.
If hockey goes the same way then I can find better things to do at the weekends.
Good job the National Trust don't charge royalties for the photos people take of the Lake District..... or perhaps they're missing a trick.
|
|
Milkman™
Les Strongman
Always Delivers
Posts: 5,300
|
Post by Milkman™ on Sept 28, 2006 0:50:49 GMT
The terms of the Premier league licence are..
Premier League Photographic Licence Agreement. All photographs taken at Premier League matches are subject to this agreement. No photograph or composite may be altered in any way save for normal retouching i.e. spotting. This states that any reproduction is prohibited unless permission, in writing, has been obtained from the Premier League, or the Member Club employing the player(s), or any employee of the Club featured in the photograph, save for: 1) An ordinary edition of any newspaper or any supplement included in the paper save for supplements on larger paper, glossy paper or sold separately that is not based solely on any Club and/or players and/or any fixture any Club has or will play. 2) A magazine or periodical produced at regular intervals and not devoted solely to any Club and/or players and/or any fixture any Club has or will play. 3) A book that is not based solely on the Premier League and any Club and/or players and/or any fixture any Club has or will play 4) Wraprounds and inserts for any competitions contained in or attached to any publication as set out in (1). 5)Advertising promotional and marketing materials and point of sale materials for any items set out in (1) and (4) of above, in each case in printed paper format only. 6) An Internet site that is an equivalent version of any of the above (1) to (5) which have been published, and which include the said photograph.
|
|
|
Post by Rob #12 on Sept 28, 2006 6:27:55 GMT
No, from the convo I had with Panthers, it is any EIHL player, the league retain the rights to them. Apparently gonna come down hard too. That's why they have been taken off Panthers Online. Something of a grey area. What constitutes "broadcasting" on the internet? Having a collection of photos on a personal web site which may be viewed by cyber visitors is little different from showing an album of photographic prints to people who call at your house. If there is no commercial activity on the site, and especially if the quality of the pictures is below the professional level, then what is the problem? The Cage admin team discussed the matter in the wake of Panthers recent statement. To be on the safe side, we decided that as a general rule, we won't permit hockey photos to be displayed directly on the Cage - a sad state of affairs and a poor reflection on those who run the league. Effectively, that means not using the "img" command, even though the images are not hosted by the Cage. However, I have no qualms about links being posted on the Cage to sites that contain hockey photos. As far as I'm aware there are no regulations regarding links on websites and nor should there be. If Panthers or the League have any problems with individuals having hockey pictures on their personal websites then they should take up the matter with them directly. Links to external websites is a concept that is still poorly understood in some circles - including some business and legal sectors. This whole episode is rather sad. We are living in an age where where image capture and transmission (for personal, non-commercial use) is rapidly becoming an everyday normality and commercial organisations need to come to terms with that reality. Tell me about it mate. I have emailed the league mate to gain clarification what what I can and can not use. I also asked for any justifications if indeed the Panthers were right about me having to take the pics off. We have only removed pics from Panthers Online until we get word from the EIHL, to cover our backs. All pics were taken by myself, nothing plagurised (sp?). If anything is borrowed, links to the site I got them from and credits follow. We can't see the issue either, so will see what the league say. I can update you guys if you when I do. Rob
|
|
Ian
Matt Myers
Posts: 1,702
|
Post by Ian on Sept 28, 2006 7:21:27 GMT
Good job the National Trust don't charge royalties for the photos people take of the Lake District..... or perhaps they're missing a trick. Probably won't be long until they do...if cathedrals and stately homes can force you to buy a photo pass, the "custodians" of our outdoor scenery might not be far behind. Not good news for those, like me in the future, trying to make a living out of the tourist industry! Anyway, back on topic. I would assume that footballers' contracts include clauses governing image rights (a bone of contention between David Beckham and Man Utd once upon a time I believe) but I would be very surprised if the standard EIHL contracts do so. Based on that, if someone had a player's written permission to use a photo of him......might make an interesting test case. Another question - do these "rules" apply to current players / kits / logos only (i.e. can you publish pictures from previous seasons) once the players concerned are out of contract and the logo is no longer used?
|
|
panthermick
Ross Lambert
visit Hockey Net UK for all the latest hockey news results fixtures stats photo's & much more
Posts: 1,345
|
Post by panthermick on Sept 28, 2006 7:46:50 GMT
I have removed the photo's from Staurdays game for now. see link below. homepage.ntlworld.com/michael.morley4/pics_of_week.htmLet me know what you find out please Rob. The thing is we take our own photo's put them on the net for a week or so then take them off. I added a link to where you could buy Panther photo's, so gaving the Panthers free advert for picture sales & maybe helping them sell more. Its a shame its coming to this, when I 1st started my site there was not many up to date sites on the web about Hockey, now its a little more popoular we can now go whistle. Sad days for me, 26 years of watching & playing the great game & now what is gonna happen, web sites are a good source for people to find out that the game actualy exists in this country as many people do not. This season I have gone out my way to save & sponsor a Panthers Player, am I allowd to take photo's & display them of him or not. Oh well with this & ZT is it all worth it. If you read this Mr Black please let me know what you think by emailing me. Thanks Mick
|
|
MP
Paul Adey
Hail hurts and rain is cold. Summer in the mountains
Posts: 6,811
|
Post by MP on Sept 28, 2006 9:29:11 GMT
Sad days for me, 26 years of watching & playing the great game & now what is gonna happen, web sites are a good source for people to find out that the game actualy exists in this country as many people do not. Aye, sad indeed Mick. Doesn't sit well with the incessant pleas to tell your friends and relatives what a great spectacle ice hockey is. A picture is worth a thousand words - strange then not be able to display images of the game to get the point across.
|
|
Dave
Robert Lachowicz
Posts: 456
|
Post by Dave on Sept 28, 2006 12:20:16 GMT
"Dave
Im not slagging anyone here but those are snapshots
Sorry to the photographer, but they would not be published"
I never really post on here in this type of thread but here goes:
a) The pics from Edinburgh arent mine, Im assuming the above remark relates to those shots only, a little clarity would be nice as Im assuming Im not the Dave mentioned!
b) There is nothing wrong with the quality of my pics, they are taken with the best sports lenses and the best camera bodies in the market today. They are always sharp with a proper white balance. They are proper pics not "snapshots" IMHO.
c) I am a full time professional photographer, unfortunately there isnt enough money in hockey alone to make a living, so I turn my hand to other things photographically, not sure this makes me a poor photographer or someone that doesnt deliver pictures on time for media deadlines. What it does do is mean I continue to have a good lifestyle and provide for a family.
D) I am respectful of the EIHL branding and their teams etc. Thats why seldom will you see coverage of any road games on my site cept player portrait style pics of Panthers players only. By the same token I do not feature portrait style pics of visiting players when photographed here in Nottingham.
I hope that makes sense!
Therapy...I never really got to know you when you were at Panthers, and I always admire the speed and efficency you guys deliver a end product using the latest technology. I know we shared a couple of emails but if you want to IM me privately or mail me always like to hear from a fellow tog!
|
|
|
Post by charlish2099 on Sept 28, 2006 12:38:44 GMT
sure he did not mean your photo's dave, only got a couple of your shots and they have pride of place at home, will be ordering some more soon, good work Dave look forward to seeing your Cardiff shots.
|
|
|
Post by Lucy on Sept 28, 2006 12:48:46 GMT
So...... 1. Someone takes some photos at the game, then next day puts them on the Cage - which is now illegal. or 2. Someone takes some photos at the game, then next day shows them to their mates - is this now illegal too? What is the difference? None, as far as I can see, but taken literally, it means we shouldn't even show anyone our photos Crazy situation!
|
|