watermarking sponsor's content

[SmithsMedia]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

No, that's not true. Any level of ownership is a HUGE step away from being public domain. Almost nothing is public domain.
Yes, and they make content available to us to promote THEIR sites, not ours. A sponsor's content is not meant to be a traffic source.

I think you have mis understood me, reading your second comment, if I was to do this and marked it with a site promoting their programme.

I dont think its right to have a picture of 'Jane.com' and then put a url for a site on it that is not promoting the 'jane.com'

Heres a site I have that is a live sample of what I mean -

this http://www.inbedwithfaith.org.uk/in-...aith/page1.htm

I would not use it for anything else, no point thats what they are wanting to buy. These pages get funkstered and stuff which leads to sales.

Regarding onwership levels I don't disagree, I have met a lot of people around europe with sites and other content producers, most people acept that if you are online your stuff will get ripped off. Again I dont think this is good but we all realise this is what happens.

BTW UW I saw an old post re a freesite project you were doing, this is why I was coming here - now I am locked into this dam debate

[frankthetank]

Originally Posted by SmithsMedia

I think you have mis understood me, reading your second comment, if I was to do this and marked it with a site promoting their programme.

I dont think its right to have a picture of 'Jane.com' and then put a url for a site on it that is not promoting the 'jane.com'

Heres a site I have that is a live sample of what I mean -

this http://www.inbedwithfaith.org.uk/in-...aith/page1.htm

I would not use it for anything else, no point thats what they are wanting to buy. These pages get funkstered and stuff which leads to sales.

Regarding onwership levels I don't disagree, I have met a lot of people around europe with sites and other content producers, most people acept that if you are online your stuff will get ripped off. Again I dont think this is good but we all realise this is what happens.

BTW UW I saw an old post re a freesite project you were doing, this is why I was coming here - now I am locked into this dam debate

Intellctual property law has more or less different rules in different countries. But there are international contracts which have brought some standards. For further information have a look here:

http://www.wipo.int/library/en/

One is that the owner of the property - and only the owner - is allowed to mark the property with his name or business name.
It´s exactly that what you do with your domain name in the example and it´s of course not allowed, because you claim to be the owner of that property, though you don´t have any copyrights on that pic.

[SmithsMedia]

Originally Posted by frankthetank

Intellctual property law has more or less different rules in different countries. But there are international contracts which have brought some standards. For further information have a look here:

http://www.wipo.int/library/en/

One is that the owner of the property - and only the owner - is allowed to mark the property with his name or business name.
It´s exactly that what you do with your domain name in the example and it´s of course not allowed, because you claim to be the owner of that property, though you don´t have any copyrights on that pic.

No I dont have the CR or do I own the pic, what I do have is the consent from the sponsor.

[frankthetank]

Originally Posted by SmithsMedia

No I dont have the CR or do I own the pic, what I do have is the consent from the sponsor.

OK, if the sponsor allows you to do so, it´s not a problem. I was speaking generally. And it´s generally not OK to watermark any content without permission. Most sponsors don´t allow it anyway.