I'm probably about to kick open a hornets nest but the discussion is worth the risk of a few unkind words, as I'm not one to shy away from standing behind what I believe and speaking my mind- as some might already know.
I'm also quite sure that the first to speak there minds will probably be the same folks who brought me to write this post but I do hope others might share there opinion as well.

Please, before I get into the details of the issues some have had, let me get a few facts out there:
A. Its facts and truths I'm concerned with, not if someone has taken offence.
B. Being polite is important but up to an extent.
C. For the sake of this discussion please give me the benefit of the doubt-
In no way do or did I want to misrepresent anything and assure you that my honesty is not at question.

Now to the point at hand (to keep it short I'll write in bullets)-

- A while ago I purchased a lovely watch from a very friendly OF member.
- As part of the sale I had received photos of the watch, photos I am almost sure the seller claimed he did not take himself but were sent to him by the previous owner.
- I decided sell the watch and created my firs sale on OF, exciting yet risky, as some members aren't always kind
when mistakes are made and being new to the hobby and a new member to OF I have had my fair share of
bashings by some not so kind members.
- Having buyers interest in mind, I decided to use the photos I had received. They where still very accurate and
true to the watch, much better than anything I might take.
- Soon after uploading the sale thread- the thread was deleted without any explanation.
- I then created a 2nd sale thread, hoping this time it would stay there (after making a few adjustments).
By the way, at this time I hadn't a clue the photos might be a problem.
- It didn't take long and I was contacted by a member claiming to be the owner of the photos demanding I delete
the photos right away.
- Not long after that another kind heart posted a question on the sale thread asking if I had asked the owner for
consent. He obviously new I didn't but Covid boredom can make people do strange things.

I never thought of hunting down the photographer asking for permission for a few reasons-
1- It never crossed my mind.
2- It was obvious to me that owning the item gave me the rights it's photos.
3- I assumed others did the same- the seller did pass the photos on to me.
4- Anyone can claim to have taken the photos.
5- No harm was intended or done in any way by posting pictures of an item I OWN.

Although I am quite confident I have managed things correctly and pretty confidant I won't change my opinion (unless someone can point out a reason to as how I might of harmed anyone).
I'd really love to hear how you see things.

Please, no matter your opinion, keep it pleasant.
Thanks
Yoni

 

I don’t really think that it’s a big deal. It probably would have been best if you had asked for consent to use the photos as a courtesy, but why someone who no longer has ownership of the watch would object to their use seems unreasonable to me. The only exceptions that I can think of would be if the photos were copyrighted or contained personally identifiable information about the seller or previous owner(s). Maybe they were planning to publish a photojournalism piece about their past purchases in the latest edition of Watch Beautiful?

 

Ok I will pleasantly suggest you take your own pictures. How difficult is that?

 

Thanks for your honest opinion.
I can't imagine doing so but if i would have contacted a member, notifying him that the photos were taken by me, it would probably be just a "by the way did you know...", "Happy to have assisted and good luck! Not to scold him for using them.

 

Polite discussion should be promoted and I kind of understand were you're coming from.

I am of the opinion that one should take their own photos and if one wants to use pictures taken by others, regardless of subject matter, then ask politely for permission if its possible and cite the source.

 

Hi Janice, I was waiting for your Input.
It's not the difficulty of doing so that is at question but the right to do so.
I'm a shitty photographer anyway, photos by me wouldn't do the watch any justice.
The question at hand was automatically why not?

 

Just curious: did the person(s) who took the original pictures you used know that you now owned the watch?

And, once you disclosed it, did you ask them nicely whether you could use same in your for sale post?

At the end of the day, while I would find it strange that they would still object, they have a say in how they want their pics used.

My preference as a buyer, would be anyway that you post RECENT pics of the watch, that you took yourself. You could always have volunteered the "better" pics taken by someone else in private DM, if requested by the potential buyer.

 

To add to my previous post, the photos ARE the property of the individual who took them and so you do not have the unqualified right to use them without permission. That being said, I’m not sure why the owner would object unless the photos were copyrighted or there was some other valid reason to prohibit their use.

 

Now that I can relate to and probably do so in the future but would you have contacted me in a rude manner demanding I delete them? Would you have soiled my sale thread with an irrelevant comment?
I myself wouldn't think of doing so as actions like that in my book are far worse then the uploaded pictures.

 

I am with you... but it also depends what kind of pics. Not everybody has the ability to take macro shots for example.

 

Doing THIS would certainly NOT be cool...

 

Not sure if you are a lawyer, but your avatar suggests so. In any case, question for you: if said pictures had been posted in a previous thread on the forums somewhere, does the person who took the original shots maintain the intellectual property on them or are they now considered "public" property?
Just curious.

 

I can relate to that, but these are vintage watches that have probably had many owners, any one 9f them could have taken the photos.
I have never yet asked if the photos of a watch I was buying were recent or who took them as long as they are true to the watches description.
Photos of any watch selling might be months old but as long as they are correct to the watch who cares. Like I said in the thread, honestly is expected from all of us when it comes to watches, I don't think a watch is described any better if one points out as to the origin or date of the photos provided (as long as they are accurate of course)

 

To give my perspective, and in agreement with @MTROIS recent photos are my strong preference. It’s also how I get to know the seller, and I typically ask for a specific photo just as part of the diligence process. And if they are for some reason not your own photos, that should indeed be fully disclosed, to avoid someone familiar with those photos to wrongly assume it’s a fraudulent sales post.

Edit: also, it’s not too hard to take adequate photos on a phone these days, so I would just invest some time in learning the basics. You really shouldn’t need to have to rely on someone else’s photos, and you can avoid this whole fiasco.

 

Having seen the photos in question, I can see why you used them...they're very good photos of the watch. I personally wouldn't have an issue if someone used my photos of a watch I had previously sold, but I also understand why someone would. I think it would have been best if you had placed a disclaimer in the sales ad that the photos accurately showed the current condition of the watch, but that you hadn't taken them.

 

I really can't seem to grasp the problem. If any member submitted a photo of a watch I own ( even you Janice), for instance as an example in a thread (any thread) I might have the right to request the member remove it, but would I? No No No
I am mostly a positive nice guy and hope that whoever I have been in contact with me on OF agrees.
The only misshapes I have had have been mostly as a result of me being new to the site, New to the hobby, my English of from members who get pleasure out of taking the shit out of others.

 

You seem to have copied photos and some of the description from a sales post of nearly a year ago. It looks like a scam as you don't even seem to have acknowledged that these photos are from before your ownership. It might be better to take a few recent photos as it seems unlikely that the watch is still in that condition. You're leaving yourself open to someone returning the watch as there is a small scratch that isn't in the photos.

Why not take a few photos now to replace those in your advert and also link to the original sales post in your advert? That way, the original photographer won't be upset and people will be able to see the watch condition today. I wouldn't buy a watch if I knew the photos were a year old.

Cheers, Chris

 

No , I would not have done that. A polite PM would have been my choice of action.

 

I’d just rather see an amateur shot that you took of the watch than a professional macro that someone else took. Or you can simply add the other photos that someone else took as supplemental.

Regardless of your personal preference, I would say best practice is to list photos that you know potential buyers would want. Better chance at a sale, no?

 

It is a fairly common scam for people to scrape photos from sales listings or even normal posts to advertise a watch they don't have and have no intention of selling. Adding the fact that the copyright of a photo lies with the photographer and not the subject, it's pretty easy to understand why your posts were taken down.

OF is a bit unique in the sales forums I browse in that it doesn't require a proof of ownership photo as a part of the listing. In future, I think you can avoid all difficulties by clearly stating which photos are yours vs a previous owner and also including at let a few photos of your own, if nothing else to prove ownership