Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

interesting. I wonder if Runner's World will take any legal action or if they even can? are photographers agencies in total control of the photo's? So this isn't Sarah's fault because this is a third party doing it.
1 posted on 11/17/2009 7:37:05 PM PST by Bigtigermike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Bigtigermike

From the wording it sounds like the “stock agency” owns the photo and therefore can do anything they want with it.


2 posted on 11/17/2009 7:41:00 PM PST by Artemis Webb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

Runner’s World could sue, but what money does Newsweek have left anyway. They are firing their employees left and right. I look forward to that “Magazine” going out of business permanently. Who reads that crap anyway, besides people sitting at the dentist office waiting to get their teeth drilled. I personally read Sports Illustrated at the Dentist’s office.


3 posted on 11/17/2009 7:41:48 PM PST by Sarah Barracuda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

They also retouched the photo- and eliminated the blue star mom flag.


4 posted on 11/17/2009 7:42:19 PM PST by rintense (You do not advance conservatism by becoming more liberal. ~ rintense, 2006)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
So this isn't Sarah's fault because this is a third party doing it.

What? How could it be her fault? She probably released the rights to the image to Runner's World, which, according to this statement, did NOT release it to Newsweak, which, in turn, got it from the photographer. How could any of this be her fault?

5 posted on 11/17/2009 7:42:31 PM PST by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
without Runner’s World’s knowledge or permission.

Seems possibly they did need permission.
6 posted on 11/17/2009 7:42:43 PM PST by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
are photographers agencies in total control of the photo's?

Photographers own the copyright on their photographs.

Period.

11 posted on 11/17/2009 7:45:55 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

Typically Photographer/Publisher agreements of this nature are exhaustingly detailed “boilerplate” agreements where each party owns some particularly narrow rights to use of the work product (the photos).

It’s more likely than not (but by no means certain) that the photographer was acting within the rights granted under the contract agreement.

Runners World just wants to make it clear that they aren’t the ones who whored out the pics.


12 posted on 11/17/2009 7:46:11 PM PST by crescen7 (game on)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

Why is everyone looking at this photo like it is a bad thing? Sarah looks stunning in it. She appears to be in incredible shape and I fail to see a downside to this photo at all. The left is just “wee-weed up” because they have no one that would look that good in running shorts. I don’t think thast any of them run. Maybe Hillary does to the McDonald’s down the street or something.


13 posted on 11/17/2009 7:46:22 PM PST by Bad Jack Bauer (Fat and Bald? I was BORN fat and bald, thank you very much!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
Didn't they take the picture off going rouge and use it on a parody book about Sara too? How could they use the same picture on that book as on hers?
14 posted on 11/17/2009 7:49:24 PM PST by guitarplayer1953 (Romak 7.62X54MM, AK47 7.62X39MM, LARGO 9X23MM, HAPINESS IS A WARM GUN BANG BANG YEA YEA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
World will take any legal action or if they even can? are photographers agencies in total control of the photo's?

the photo did appear in the Runner' mag. They hired and paid the photog. for the work. They own it. The photog. had no right to sell it.

This was a sleazy move by Newsweek - but in the long run, it does them the harm it hoped it would do Sarah. People do not like someone treating Sarah like this.

Here's another photo that was in 'Runner's'

Sweet little Trig. What a testament he is to the character of his momma.

21 posted on 11/17/2009 7:53:13 PM PST by maine-iac7 ("He has the right to criticize who has the heart to help" Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

I think the whole thing is great. Just another example (as if we need any more) of the snarky depths the Palin haters will go to in their attempts to marginalize her, and in the process making themselves look ridiculous.


27 posted on 11/17/2009 8:03:02 PM PST by Minn (Here is a realistic picture of the prophet: ----> ([: {()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
Here's the fun part - even lib women say this was a sleaze move - even WHOOPIE!

CAn anyone say ‘backfire?”

30 posted on 11/17/2009 8:05:02 PM PST by maine-iac7 ("He has the right to criticize who has the heart to help" Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

Runners World does many stories on running celebs etc

Did a great one on President Bush marathoner

Another on Gen Petraeus

Even one on Gore

One on Palin was very well done

Been a subscriber since 78


31 posted on 11/17/2009 8:05:30 PM PST by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

I use that photo on my website, shes a beauty.
http://www.brayincandy.com

Pray for America and Lady Palin


34 posted on 11/17/2009 8:11:17 PM PST by bray (America Gu Bra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
Everybody's right, everybody's wrong, everyone, or many above, think they know everything about publishing rights. Whatevah! Whoever owns the rights to the pitcher, it is highly unusual and cheap for a magazine, isn't it, to re-publish a photograph that was recently printed in another popular magazine, and on the cover no less. It speaks of desperation of the MSM, while specialized magazines like Runner's World and Guns and Ammo seem to be doing A-OK, ya?
40 posted on 11/17/2009 8:34:39 PM PST by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike

Isn’t it weird that NewsWeak would run a major story about a politician, and not send their own photographer to take a picture, but instead would purchase a stock picture from an agency?
.


53 posted on 11/18/2009 8:05:42 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bigtigermike
I hope that Runner's World sues Newsweak into bankruptcy.

This is THEFT, and I hope that Newsweak is ruined over it.

56 posted on 11/18/2009 9:29:30 AM PST by GI Joe Fan (GI Joe represents Real American Heroes, not a bunch of globalist drones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson