maanantai 13. helmikuuta 2017

TedTalks and Copyrights

I spent this evening by watching TED talks. With a rising fever, I have really not done anything productive today. Still my blog writing constantly disrupted by a random dance party.

Here is a track that has been stuck in my head since HelsinkiEC Meeting's after party on Wednesday.

We, LaureaES and Helsinki Think Company, organized with other Helsinki area Entrepreneurship Societies a meeting for all stakeholders in startup scene in Maria 0-1. It was a huge success and we were sold out and had over hundred participants and 250 + interests in our Facebook event in three weeks. What we did for marketing was pretty simple. We created a fuss. We made our event a big thing. That is all. I think that a hype about something is the best form of inbound marketing, which was this week's topic.

School wise, last week was quick and not as productive as the last. This was because our group had done our mandatory work before hand. In our lectures we learnt that Inbound marketing consists all that you can find on internet about the subject. The customer comes to you; you just need to be there for them. Social media, websites, blogs and SEO. I already covered social media visibility in my last blogpost, which was selected to be a blog of the week, a huge thanks for that!
I am really fond of the concept of inbound marketing, and will be watching for example the Hotspot’s employee’s lecture again sometime. Have to say that the Thursdays lecture was bit hard to follow, even that I am pretty fluent in English.

All rights reserved By Heidi Lehtonen
All rights reserved By Heidi Lehtonen

On Monday we had a guest lecturer Anu Nousiainen, who gave as an interesting lecture about service design. It was very detailed and informative. She spoke about how we are driven by our emotions and how to harness that power to make services to feel more valuable for the customer and to wake up their emotional responses. There was a one thing in her lecture that I would like to talk about.

I am all about details, I know. If you follow me on snapchat (@sswwiiful) , you might already know what I am about to say.

I did not know was I supposed to laugh or cry. I think this subject will be discussed in the law week of this course but it is very important problem.

First of all,
Image Source: internet 

Oh Really?!
I would not have figured that!
More specific label could have only been; Image source: Camera.

Copyright is a legal right created by the law of a country that grants the creator of an original work exclusive rights for its use and distribution….. Copyright is a form of intellectual property, applicable to certain forms of creative work.

 Nobody knows the amount of photographs that there are on the internet. Put still every picture has an owner, a maker, a photographed. In most cases, that maker did put their picture on the internet to other to enjoy, but probably did not intended it to end up in a slideshow in a Finnish auditorium.

You are not allowed to share the picture without a permission. Not ever. Even that the image is already on the internet, is the asking permission from the artist always mandatory when you publish the picture in other context.

The only case you don’t have to credit, is when the photographer has given a permission to use to photo in so called Creative Commons- licenses.

Why the big fuss?
I am a photographer, and as I have made my living out of it in the past, why would I want to people to use my photos as free? And without giving me a credit from my job? If you were a baker, would it be nice to people take a bread from you without paying, just because it was on the table?

I once had to email an organization for miss use of my photograph, that they had put on their website. I had posted the picture in a Facebook page, that I then managed, but since my time of volunteering was over, I deleted admin rights from myself. Since they took over the Facebook page, they had found a picture there. They did not use my name and used the website in their marketing, so I was pretty pissed about that case. I emailed them, and they removed the picture with an apology. If I wanted, I could have also send them a bill from use of my photo, but I am not that evil since they did not know any better.

You don’t need to credit the maker if you share it to your friend for example on WhatsApp, but if they use it on their blog, if they publish it anywhere, they should have asked the maker if they can use the photo and also give credit. Taking pictures from internet is not the prober way to do things.

As you see I am pretty strict when it comes to this, and the photos I use on my blog now, are eather my own, I have asked a permission to use the photo or they are labelled as Creative commons CC0 Which means I can copy, modify, distribute, and use the images, even for commercial purposes, all without asking for permission or giving credits to the artist. To the extent possible under law, the unloaders have waived their copyright and related or neighbouring rights to these Images and Videos. For example Pixabay has pictures under this license. There is also other kind of CC- licenses which I mentioned above. Pictures under this license you can find from example in Flickr.

If you wonder how to credit a picture the "right" way, check the first picture of the post. Note that it is under All Rights Recerved, put I do have a permission to use her picture in my blog.

Ei kommentteja:

Lähetä kommentti