Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Sweetwater Sound has my Lightwave Zon!!!

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by frederic b. hodshon, Oct 31, 2004.


  1. frederic b. hodshon

    frederic b. hodshon Supporting Member

    May 10, 2000
    Lake Forest, CA
    None.
  2. nonsqtr

    nonsqtr The emperor has no clothes!

    Aug 29, 2003
    Burbank CA USA
    My thought is, don't ask them to remove the picture, ask them to pay royalties instead (and back royalties). And if they won't talk to you, hit 'em with a lawsuit. That'll get their attention. :D

    If you choose to pursue that path, remember that evidence is the key to the law. Can you prove it's your bass? Your picture? Do you have anything with a date on it, that precedes their first known use of your pic? That kind of thing...

    I agree that it would be very unprofessional to steal someone else's pic for commercial purposes. On the other hand, it's done all the time. That's why I watermark all my pics using a digital spider (that means it can be found with a webcrawler).

    Good luck with your efforts!
     
  3. BTBbassist

    BTBbassist join us for mankala hour!

    Apr 20, 2002
    Westlake Village, CA
    Out of curiosity, did you come across that Sweetwater page yourself?

    I've found Sweetwater to be an extremely service oriented company, so I think they will resolve the issue promptly. That said, you would think Sweetwater would know not to use a private picture in this manner.

    Take 'em to the cleaners! :)
     
  4. Thee

    Thee

    Feb 11, 2004
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    Hey, you know, it's hard taking pictures of basses, you have to like, make them stay still... and then you have to like figure out how to make the digital camera work... it's hard work. They're working hard.
     
  5. frederic b. hodshon

    frederic b. hodshon Supporting Member

    May 10, 2000
    Lake Forest, CA
    None.
    i've dealt with SW in the past, never a problem.

    for such a renowned outfit to pull something like this is very surprizing.

    i bet its as simple as the web designer grabbing a bass pic from the web as a placeholder and forgetting to change it.

    regardless, its unacceptable.

    it is MY bass, i still have it and it is fairly well known with my on-line bass buds. its my carpet too. :p

    there's a thread on alt.guitar.bass that brought this to my attention. they knew it was my bass on that forum.

    i've e-mailed them, asked them to remove the pic, apologize and/or compensate.

    i'm not gonna make a big deal out of this. litigation over something like would be silly.

    i appreciate the supportive comments.

    kind of a backhanded compliment.

    i feel like i should be up in arms about this, but it doesn't really bother me.

    now, if they had used some artwork or music i had created, i'd REALLY be upset.

    f
     
  6. frederic b. hodshon

    frederic b. hodshon Supporting Member

    May 10, 2000
    Lake Forest, CA
    None.
    hehe.

    and don't forget to vote!

    f
     
  7. lbanks

    lbanks

    Jul 17, 2003
    Ennui, IN USA
    Force them to carry some other basses in addition to Fenders!:D
     
  8. Peter Parker

    Peter Parker Banned

    Jun 10, 2001
    Your stance on this is completely silly. It's a picture, so what. How in the world does this hurt you? What have they taken from you? You seem to really like Zon basses and probably are friendly with Joe Zon. If your picture helps to sell one of his basses then I would think that to be good thing. To want compensated for the little bit of effort it took to take the photo is petty. To ask them to remove it to me is just as petty. I could go into a whole rant that could take this much deeper onto a national level but then I would sound paranoid :D My opinion is to leave it alone.
     
  9. cosmodrome

    cosmodrome Registered User

    Apr 30, 2004
    ****town, Netherlands
    +1.

    Grow up :scowl:
     
  10. Thee

    Thee

    Feb 11, 2004
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    AAAAAAhahahahahahahaaaaa
     
  11. waxcomb

    waxcomb

    Jun 29, 2003
    Martinez, CA
    Sweetwater doesn't even sell Zon on their site, so he's not helping sell anything but a myth that they carry it. If that was his intention, his pictures could be on the Zon site. Should we all give our work to whoever steals it so that they can profit without compensating the artist? It's a jump, I know, but is it more grown up to be used by someone? Is it more grown up to use pictures without permission? I know that I would not want my material used without my knowledge. It's not about compensation, it's about giving credit where it is due.
     
  12. lbanks

    lbanks

    Jul 17, 2003
    Ennui, IN USA
    I'm sorry, but I disagree. The term is infringement. The simple matter is, no one has the right to use a person's visage or property to advertise, without their permission and renumeration. That principle has been a driving force in business. That why Fender sued; that's why Microsoft will sue anyone who even thinks about infringing on their trademark products . Would you feel that way if someone used a recording of you playing someone else's song for an advertisement and didn't pay you or acknowledge your conntribution? Sweetwater owes him; I believe Sweetwater will make it right, but they still owe him. Besides, it false advertising; Sweetwater doesn't sell Zons or Lightwaves.
     
  13. LajoieT

    LajoieT I won't let your shadow be my shade...

    Oct 7, 2003
    Western Massachusetts
    Well as a professional photographer I have a HUGE issue with this. Sure, fhodshon probably would have let them use the image for free if they had asked, but they did not, and that is blatantly ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR be it on the internet or otherwise. There is also a large industry of photographers who take photographs of objects and sell them for use just like this one (often they sell the CD with the license that the purchasing company can use it for whatever they wish other than to sell it to someone else). So not only are they stealing fhodshon's property, but they are removing revenue from a legitimate segement of the market.

    Would it be any different if his photo showed up in the new Carvin catalog? I think not! It seems that a LOT of people do not take the Internet as something serious because it is not a tangeable product like a catalog or newspaper. The company I work for was just the subject of a somewhat negative article in a national buisiness magazine and our PR Department had coppies of the article, the interesting thing was that as negative as the article was, the version on their web site was FAR worse for the main reason that it states MANY things that are unsubstantiated and wouldn't hold up to requests for backup proof that is typically requested of them. I feel that this newspaper has basically treated it's web site as nothing more than a supermarket tabloid with their well known name attached to it and I cannot see how they could hold it up to different journalistic standards than the print version.

    {steps off soapbox and walks away}
     
  14. gojirin

    gojirin

    Oct 11, 2004
    Denver,CO
    Is it a big deal? Yes, it reflects on the companies honesty and integrity. I'm willing to to bet that it was a sloppy mistake, but there are no real excuses for using a picture on a commercal site without permission, esp if they aren't selling the product!! So what else are they making up?
    Makes me want to shop there...

    By the way, what a cool bass!!
     
  15. MyDogBo

    MyDogBo

    Aug 25, 2002
    LA
    I have a '32 Ford hiboy roadster that's appeared all over the world in car mags without my permission .. Japan, Germany .. including in 'product' endorsing adds. Unless you have nothing better to do it takes way more time than it's worth to chase it all down ..
     
  16. Peter Parker

    Peter Parker Banned

    Jun 10, 2001
    He's not a professional photographer selling his pics so a service was not stolen from him. The arguement about it taking from the actual business of folks who do take pics for sale is lame. Since they don't sell Zon to me it makes the pic even more harmless. SInce they don't sell Zon's they aren't using the pic as an advert.
    Several of you are trying to turn this into something it's not. Fred took a pic, it's on some website not taking a dime out of anyone's pocket, hurting none. It's that simple. If Fred had taken the pic with the intent of selling it and these guys put it up for free, then sure that's wrong. But that's not the case.
     
  17. nonsqtr

    nonsqtr The emperor has no clothes!

    Aug 29, 2003
    Burbank CA USA
    Use digital watermarking software like DigiMarc. You can mark a picture before you post it, and then every night while you're asleep the software will crawl the web and identify every instance that's out there. Cheap and very effective. In the morning you'll get a little report with a list of URL's, and you can use Sam Spade or some such tool to figure out who owns those sites. Well, as others have said, "if you care". :D
     
  18. tiefling

    tiefling

    Aug 19, 2003
    Washington DC
    did you notice the warr guitar about half way down on the right in the "why buy your bass from sweetwater" ad? I think their webmaster got a little "creative".
     
  19. LajoieT

    LajoieT I won't let your shadow be my shade...

    Oct 7, 2003
    Western Massachusetts
    I wasn't making the claim that he was a photographer and had his work stollen from him, BUT there ARE photographers out there who make their living from this, so every photograph that is used in this manner effectively removes the amount of $$ that they would have made if the images were obtained properly from the market of images sold for use on e-commerce sites. It's not outright theft, but it does have an impact on the people in that field of work.

    Also before we all put too much of the blame on Sweetwater, it is entirely possible (even rather likely) that they simply hired another company to design and host their E-Commerce site and it is THAT company, not Sweetwater, that snagged the image and used it. A LOT of people who got into the Web to make a buck have very low morals when it comes to this type of thing and have been know to grab all kinds of stuff from other sites (graphics, text, code, you name it...) and then make $$$ by charging some unsuspecting client for it.
     
  20. gojirin

    gojirin

    Oct 11, 2004
    Denver,CO
    Some interesting points being brought up here. I would still make the point that the store, by using the picture, is claiming to sell or have sold the pictured guitar. Why else would it be there? This is not some fanzine...