Great input Pete and I agree with all your points. I try to stay out of this discussion because I have already brought up these issues to no avail.

We all love Chipguide. It’s a great resource. The simple problem is this

1.) Chipguide wants to claim their newly cropped/adjusted photos of submissions are NEW COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DERIVATIVES. This is patently false. Until you agree to this premise every discussion after is moot and built on a false premise.

2.) If Chipguide would simply watermark their images, and this can be done in the most inconspicuous way, then they would avoid chasing down image takers and use their time for better pursuits. Everyone agrees that Chipguide should receive credit for hosting and displaying these images submitted by others.

Watermarks are not anti-copy measures but more of a notice that hey this is ours. Can they be removed? Yes, anything can nowadays but at least making the effort creates a statement of use.

I believe Chipguide’s aversion to using watermarks is because they want to claim ownership of the “new” photos they believe they have created for possible future use like a price-guide. No, those rights will always belong to the submitter.

Why can’t Chipguide show the same respect to its submitters copyright that they ask of their own created content?

E
R-8784