View Poll Results: Watermark , Logo or Both

Voters
13. You may not vote on this poll
  • Watermark

    1 7.69%
  • Logo

    8 61.54%
  • Both

    4 30.77%
Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: Logo, Watermark or Both

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cold Spring on Hudson
    Posts
    28,955

    Default Logo, Watermark or Both



    kaa and I are having a little debate so I figured I would put it to a WBF vote
    What is the kaa at the bottom of the photo? Is it a watermark to copyright it. Or is it a logo to just make the photo look extra pretty. Or is it both a watermark & a logo ?
    This post is temporary and my disappear at the discretion of the managment

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    15,144

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe ( Cold Spring on Hudson ) View Post
    Is it a watermark to copyright it. Or is it a logo to just make the photo look extra pretty.
    Copyright is not the purpose of a watermark and making something look "extra pretty" is not the purpose of a logo.

    Nice try, though kinda transparent :-D

    Kaa

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Guilford Ct
    Posts
    46,702

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    No.
    Kaa is more correcter than you... er....er.....
    Never trust a man with a clean workshop.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    15,144

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Here's what a watermark looks like:



    Kaa

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Alameda, CA
    Posts
    2,413

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe ( Cold Spring on Hudson ) View Post
    Or is it both a watermark & a logo ?
    Why worry... the picture is being posted multiple times on faceblook and leaky boat forum. Some choose to crop it; others used photoshop blended it right out.

    Remember once anything is posted... ones releases it to the world for others to claim it for fair use - right or wrong.
    “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.”
    Mark Twain

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    afloat with at least 6' of water under me.
    Posts
    27,929

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    A watermark is impregnated as a shadow in the threads of expensive paper and visible held to the light.To me, Kaa's is just a classy a stick signature on photos and the like and really has nothing to do with copywrites. I think it's unique.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tiny isle in Caribbean
    Posts
    3,283

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    The poll has no option for

    'Neither'

    or

    'Signature'.
    Thou shalt incur undying wrath if thou post anything, however true, that is negative (however so slightly) of the Democrats or of POTUS on this forum.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    4,625

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Where's the choice for "who gives a flying flip?" Put me down for that one please.

    (Which thread started this particular Sh!#fight anyway?)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Worthington, Massachusetts
    Posts
    16,518

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    To me the clear element that distinguishes a watermark from a logo is that a watermark is either:

    1. Behind something that you can see through (such as text) such that you can read the text as it goes over the watermark, or
    2. Semi-transparent, so you can see what is behind the watermark but also see the watermark.

    So, this example would clearly fall under definition #2. What I can't tell from this image is whether the "Kaa" mark is semi-transparent. I don't think it is but I am not positive. It would be easier to tell with an image with more contrast in the area of the "Kaa." Whether it is a logo depends on how Kaa uses it in other contexts. A logo is a graphic used to identify a business or organization. Does Kaa use the same thing on business cards, letterhead, etc? If so, then it is probably a logo. Note that a logo can be used as watermark! Neither really has anything to do with copyrighting something in a direct way, but either can be used to communicate "this image was created by _____," which, of course, helps to protect it as intellectual property, at least at a practical level. Legally it probably means almost nothing as anyone could grab an image from anywhere and slap their mark on it, and someone with decent Photoshop skills can also pretty effectively erase all but the most "aggressive" of marks, but probably not in a way that would escape detection by a skilled observer.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Alameda, CA
    Posts
    2,413

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both



    Does this violate my right for fair use once posted on a public forum?
    (will remove if requested by original content owners)

    A formal process is needed to certify a copyright. Placing a watermark or a logo is a speed bump in a digital universe.
    “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.”
    Mark Twain

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sharon, MA
    Posts
    40,616

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Hoppe View Post

    Does this violate my right for fair use once posted on a public forum?
    *LOL* Nicely done, Ted

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Worthington, Massachusetts
    Posts
    16,518

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Hoppe View Post
    Does this violate my right for fair use once posted on a public forum?
    (will remove if requested by original content owners)
    Where something is posted does not typically affect copyright (if by "posting on a public forum" you mean the posting of Kaa's original image on the forum). Posting something in a public location does not void the copyright. So, the question becomes did you meet one of the requirements of fair use? I don't think you did (except that so far this is non-commercial use, where I think pretty much anything goes). I don't think what you did rises to the level of parody and I don't think you changed it anywhere near enough for it to be something new.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Hoppe View Post
    A formal process is needed to certify a copyright. Placing a watermark or a logo is a speed bump in a digital universe.
    Creative works are copyrighted automatically at the moment of creation. Defending such a copyright in court is tough, but strictly speaking registering the item is not necessary for a creative work to be considered copyrighted. On the other hand, I agree that a watermark or logo is at best a speed bump, but it is a speed bump that will slow down some people. Many marks put on photographs will also point you back to the creator or owner's website, which clearly has other advantages to the creator/owner of the image.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    15,144

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Hoppe View Post
    Does this violate my right for fair use once posted on a public forum?
    (will remove if requested by original content owners)
    No, it does not. But now it needs to have a shark photoshopped in :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Hoppe View Post
    A formal process is needed to certify a copyright.
    No, it does not. In the US you get copyright just by the act of creation. You can register your copyright which gives you certain (large) advantages in copyright-infringement suits, but just to have a copyright you don't need to do anything special.

    Kaa

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Alameda, CA
    Posts
    2,413

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Hooke View Post
    Where something is posted does not typically affect copyright (if by "posting on a public forum" you mean the posting of Kaa's original image on the forum). Posting something in a public location does not void the copyright. So, the question becomes did you meet one of the requirements of fair use? I don't think you did (except that so far this is non-commercial use, where I think pretty much anything goes). I don't think what you did rises to the level of parody and I don't think you changed it anywhere near enough for it to be something new.



    Creative works are copyrighted automatically at the moment of creation. Defending such a copyright in court is tough, but strictly speaking registering the item is not necessary for a creative work to be considered copyrighted. On the other hand, I agree that a watermark or logo is at best a speed bump, but it is a speed bump that will slow down some people. Many marks put on photographs will also point you back to the creator or owner's website, which clearly has other advantages to the creator/owner of the image.
    On the contrary, it could be my belief that i created something new as both photos sources were unintended to be combined into satire and adds to this public discourse.

    The greatest challenges to innovation and the arts are being waged right now. When form factors and feel are being patented and copyrighted to stop progress both through innovation and keep business competition from entering the space. We must begin to ask questions of personal benefit verses public good. The apple vs. samsung litigation is center stage to this very questions.

    Back to the thread... Could it be that what we see in the original posting was a KAA pictograph on top of a picture of undetermined origin capturing a public space. Though it is very doubtful it could another photographers efforts could be so nicely done.
    ]
    Last edited by Ted Hoppe; 08-01-2012 at 03:11 PM.
    “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.”
    Mark Twain

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    14,057

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    a logo and watermark can be the same

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Uppah Ballard
    Posts
    5,773

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    I have a birthmark that looks a lot like a logo. Is that helpful?
    Quote Originally Posted by James McMullen View Post
    Yeadon is right, of course.
    Hey, where's my Hvalsoe 19?

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Seattle. WA
    Posts
    17,239

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Yeadon View Post
    I have a birthmark that looks a lot like a logo. Is that helpful?
    We'll need a picture to decide.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Unity, ME USA
    Posts
    3,301

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Lew Barrett View Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Yeadon
    I have a birthmark that looks a lot like a logo. Is that helpful?
    We'll need a picture to decide.

    With circles and arrows and a paragraph on back explaining what it is.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Lake of the Ozarks USA
    Posts
    7,233

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    A logo is design or monogram used to designate a organization or a person.

    A watermark is a design or monogram formed in a piece of paper, which can be seen when the paper is held up to light. Or, in digital media a watermark may be a transparent design or monogram that appears superimposed over graphics such as photographs.

    Neither of the above relates to copyright, nor has any actual value in protecting an intellectual or artistic property.

    In order to copyright a work it is necessary to post the following, visibly on the work:
    Name of a person or organization (c) and the date.
    It is then necessary to submit a copy of the work displaying the copyright mark to the U.S. Copyright Office, along with a filing fee. They will file the copy work and will mail you a document stating that you hold that copyright. This can also be done on line.

    Note that all the copyright process does is certify that you claimed authorship of the work on a particular date, and that evidence of this exists.
    The cavalry is not going to ride to your aid if someone uses your work without permission. You will need a lawyer for that.

    If someone uses your work without permission, say a pimple-faced snot in The Grand Duchy of East Obershoe decides to use a photograph that you posted on the WBF, as the decoration on a line of surf boards he is selling door to door. You decide to pursue the matter, so you hire an attorney.

    Your attorney writes a letter to Pimpleface informing him that you hold the copyright on the image, and that posting the work on line does not abrogate nor release the work to public domain. The letter also tells Pimpleface that he is to cease and desist using the image, and that he owes you a bazillion dollars in damages.

    But note again: The only protection afforded by copyright is to serve notice that you care enough about the work in question to pursue unauthorized use of it.

    Several weeks later you receive a letter from Pimpleface's lawyer (his brother-in-law). He tells you that his client doesn't owe you a fucquing dime since you cannot prove that you have suffered any actual loss from Pimpleface's use of the photograph, which he doubts is really yours.

    You begin to see what a mess this can turn into...

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    15,144

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Shang View Post
    In order to copyright a work it is necessary to post the following, visibly on the work:
    Name of a person or organization (c) and the date.
    That used to be the case long long time ago.

    That is no longer true.

    Kaa

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    10,669

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    You used to be able to mail yourself a copy of the document/picture which you left unopened. The date stamp on the sealed envelope then gave an approximate date of 'creation' should the need arise.

    No longer true, Kaa?

    Speaking of Kaa's 'marks' on his/her photos - I always wished they would connect me to a site to see his/her other work, but alas and alack, no such luck.
    "And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music." Nietzsche

    Straights are for fast cars. Turns are for fast drivers.

    Nanner's Website.
    Nanner's Blog

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    15,144

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Nanoose View Post
    You used to be able to mail yourself a copy of the document/picture which you left unopened. The date stamp on the sealed envelope then gave an approximate date of 'creation' should the need arise.
    <shrug> You can still do that if you want to. I am not sure it's a particularly useful thing to do -- for copyrights (as opposed to patents) the date rarely matters and it's up to the court to decide whether your sealed envelope proves anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nanoose View Post
    No longer true, Kaa?
    As I've mentioned, in the US you automatically get the copyright just by creating the work.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nanoose View Post
    Speaking of Kaa's 'marks' on his/her photos - I always wished they would connect me to a site to see his/her other work, but alas and alack, no such luck.
    I have plans for setting up a photo website but these plans so far are not yet implemented :-)

    Kaa

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Lake of the Ozarks USA
    Posts
    7,233

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaa View Post
    That used to be the case long long time ago.

    That is no longer true.

    Kaa
    You are right, use of the copyright mark is now optional.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Worthington, Massachusetts
    Posts
    16,518

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Hoppe View Post
    On the contrary, it could be my belief that i created something new as both photos sources were unintended to be combined into satire and adds to this public discourse.
    You can believe that but I don't think a court would agree with you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Hoppe View Post
    The greatest challenges to innovation and the arts are being waged right now. When form factors and feel are being patented and copyrighted to stop progress both through innovation and keep business competition from entering the space. We must begin to ask questions of personal benefit verses public good. The apple vs. samsung litigation is center stage to this very questions.
    I agree. I think we have gone too far, especially with patents. There should also be a better system for tracking down the creator/owner of a copyrighted work to inquire about possible use. Given the length of copyright protection there are many works that are covered by copyright or possibly covered by copyright, where it would be very difficult or impossible to track down who owns the copyright in order to get permission to use the work. So a lot of good writing and art is less known than it might be, left in dusty, rarely read books rather than quoted in new books, and left in dusty portfolios and picture frames in someone's attic.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Worthington, Massachusetts
    Posts
    16,518

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    Quote Originally Posted by Shang View Post
    You are right, use of the copyright mark is now optional.
    And registering your work is no longer necessary either, but as Kaa said, registration will help you a lot if you ever have to try to defend your copyright in court. I quite agree with Kaa: according to current US law a creative work is automatically copyrighted from the moment of creation. Indicating in or on the work that it is copyrighted, or registering the work, will help you in court but neither is necessary for the work to be copyrighted.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Auckland ,N.Z.
    Posts
    17,108

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    What do you guys want it to be?

  27. #27
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    2,480

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    I'd call it a logo.
    Nosce te ipsum

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Bright's Grove, ON, Canada
    Posts
    8,839

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    If you want to take a copyright case to court, the images will need to be registered with the copyright office.

    Allan of the Grove - S/V Laura Ellen, 1937 Gaff Schooner
    http://aylard.ca http://bluenosejr.com
    "never send a ferret to do a weasel's job.."

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Bright's Grove, ON, Canada
    Posts
    8,839

    Default Re: Logo, Watermark or Both

    The concept of putting a logo/trademark on the photo is to indicate that you own the rights to the image.
    It allows someone that comes across your image from claiming that they tried but failed to contacted the photographer. A person could (under some circumstances) use a photo without securing the rights to publish if the photo is deemed to be an orphaned work.

    Note: I'm not a lawyer and therefore cannot provide legal advise. Please consult a lawyer who specialized in copyright law.
    Allan of the Grove - S/V Laura Ellen, 1937 Gaff Schooner
    http://aylard.ca http://bluenosejr.com
    "never send a ferret to do a weasel's job.."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •