47 replies to this topic

[Dhango]

Hi people
I was wondering if there's a topic about Formula 2. I would like to get photos of those particular cars, especially the cars of the '67/'72 era. ¿It's there any website dedicated exclusively to Formula 2? I collect color photos and I would like to have some of that Formula.

[Allen Brown]

I would recommend LAT (www.latphoto.co.uk). They have lots of colour photos at very reasonable prices.

[Ted Walker]

As Allen is pushing LAT for Colour I have lots of Black & White images of F2 from that era as well ted @ferret1.co.uk

[Dhango]

As Allen is pushing LAT for Colour I have lots of Black & White images of F2 from that era as well ted @ferret1.co.uk

Thanks boys, but for now, color and free, please.

[Kitkent]

Hi, I am also a great fan of F2 like many others.You could do worse than buy the new(May 2011) Motor Sport magazine which has an article about the Rondel racing,team started by Ron Dennis+Neil Trundle. 4 pages of F2 of 1972 and 3.

[Allen Brown]

As Allen is pushing LAT for Colour I have lots of Black & White images of F2 from that era as well ted @ferret1.co.uk

Dear Ted - he did say colour or you'd have been top of my list.

As for free colour Dhango - do you mean people contributing pictures they own? You won't find many pictures that are free of copyright.

[Dhango]

Dear Ted - he did say colour or you'd have been top of my list.

As for free colour Dhango - do you mean people contributing pictures they own? You won't find many pictures that are free of copyright.

Come on, man. ¿Dou you really think that EVERYONE post pictures on the internet respecting copyrights? Like I said some place else, I have thousends of pictures from many sites, Motorsport Almanac, Racing Sports Cars, phpbbplanet/Aerogi, Autodiva, carlos-reutemann.com and many more. The guy that post a picture may or may not have the rights for it. He just post it, PERIOD. You and I and everybody else pick it up and store it in your(his, her, my)hard disk. And that's it. I can not remember exactly where I get every picture I have. Or if it's got a copyright or no. If you get a photo from, say, Schlegelmilch, with or without watermark and you store it in your PC ¿you own this photographer a copyright fee?. When you post a photo, you may put( beacuse you know), "copyright from whatever-his-name-is", but if you don't have it and can't remember where you got it, say, five years ago, ¿what can you do?. I'm not saying that everything must be for free, but, in my humble opinion, if it's in the internet, it's FREE FOR ALL. I just finish some work correcting like 350 Formula 2 photos, '65 to '73. And I picked them free. If a guy try to sell me photos, for as beautiful and rare and collectables as they may be, living in the country I live, I will not buy them. It will be impossible for me, money-wise. Sorry for my lousy english.

Edited by Dhango, 30 March 2011 - 20:12.

[Raido]

http://formula2.net/

If it hasn't been mentioned yet...

(Also, there's a 1967 F2 simulator for GPL in the works. For rFactor, there's one for the 1976 season.)

[Allen Brown]

Doesn't come across like a humble opinion.

Sorry but if you have no respect for copyright then I can't help you.

[David McKinney]

Exactly

All photographs are copyright, whether you know who owns the right or not

If it's not a photo you took, and you don't have the rights holder's permission to post it, DON'T POST IT

Anyone who behaves as if the Internet is Free for All is breaking the law

As has been said many times before, it doesn't bother me in the slightest if, say, Schlegemilch sends you a bill for €1000 for theft of his work, but it does worry me if he sues the website

[Dhango]

Exactly

All photographs are copyright, whether you know who owns the right or not

If it's not a photo you took, and you don't have the rights holder's permission to post it, DON'T POST IT

Anyone who behaves as if the Internet is Free for All is breaking the law

As has been said many times before, it doesn't bother me in the slightest if, say, Schlegemilch sends you a bill for €1000 for theft of his work, but it does worry me if he sues the website

I think you don't get it. Schlegelmilch has many pictures in his site. The ones for free are watermarked. It's allright, it's very subtle, I don't mind. If I want to share that picture, knowing that Schlegelmilch took it and owns it, I'll said "copyright by Schlegelmilch" because I know. If you want to(and can)buy a photo from him, 10"x10" or 12"x12", I don't know the size, fine, do it. But if I got a photo from five years ago, can't remember when or I get it, ¿what should I do? I've been told that, if I can't remember who owns it, at least I should post the source from where I get thet picture. OK, I'll do it. ¿But what if I can't remember the source? ¿What if the photo is a relevant piece of information, or if somebody is just looking for it to fulfill a collection? I'll give you an example. I was looking for a very long time for a color photo of Reutemann driving the Brabham BT33, Victory Race, 1971. Some fellow countryman got it on his site. Never told where he got it. It's on the web, for anyone to see it. And that's it. I have never said that I would not respect copyrights. Never. All I'm saying is that there is dozens of sites where you can get pictures for free. People post copyrights and other people don't. If you can't or won't post a picture because of copyright, OK, post a link to it. I'm trying to but I'm a dog with my PC, the instructions are in english and the technical stuff puzzles me. But I'll try, with a little help from somebody who knows better. Because it's a joyful experience to share images from the past.

Edited by Dhango, 01 April 2011 - 15:07.

[Option1]

No mate, you don't get it! They are NOT "for free" Their images (and note the "their") are displayed on their website for you to look at, NOT for you to take and most DEFINITELY NOT for you to download and then post anywhere else.

You might want to read and familiarise yourself with this: http://forums.autosp...=...p;f=10&id=8 AND this: http://forums.atlasf...showtopic=65438

Neil

Edited by Option1, 01 April 2011 - 15:54.

[Allen Brown]

Well said option.

Dhango - the images on Boris Schlegelmilch's site are not "free". Nowhere on his site does he say they are free. They are his copyright and remain his copyright no matter how long ago you downloaded them.

If you do not have the express permission of the copyright holder then you may not use it. Simple as that. If you forgot who owns it then that's your problem, not the owner's.

If a picture is on the web, it is not "for free". There are thousands of pictures on my site for example, and almost every one is protected by copyright. The only ones that aren't copyrighted are the ones where the copyright owner has specifically stated a different licence or where copyright has expired because the photograph was taken before 1923. That is just a handful.

[Dhango]

Well said option.

Dhango - the images on Boris Schlegelmilch's site are not "free". Nowhere on his site does he say they are free. They are his copyright and remain his copyright no matter how long ago you downloaded them.

If you do not have the express permission of the copyright holder then you may not use it. Simple as that. If you forgot who owns it then that's your problem, not the owner's.

If a picture is on the web, it is not "for free". There are thousands of pictures on my site for example, and almost every one is protected by copyright. The only ones that aren't copyrighted are the ones where the copyright owner has specifically stated a different licence or where copyright has expired because the photograph was taken before 1923. That is just a handful.

So you mean that, if got a picture of Reutemann from Schlegelmilch, picture that his has posted, watermarked an all, picture that, in order to see it in a moderated but better size you have to click on, with his name on it and ready to copy to my PC, and in not possible way may be confused with with anyone else´s work(remember: name and watermark) and I want to post it here, copyright and all, saying ¡hey, look at this!
¿That is not possible?
Man, he surely has an army of lawyers working 24/7 taking 90% of the site owners to court.

[Rob Ryder]

Dhango, you must realise that this is TNF and rules apply.

It is OK to scan numerous entry lists from books/magazines and post here.
It is OK to scan as many cutaway drawings as you like and post here.
It is OK to scan part or whole race reports from magazines and post here.
It is OK to scan old motoring adverts from magazines and post here.

These will not even get a mention....

You do not however post photos unless own or have copyright permission (or you have over 1,000,000 previous posts and are classed as one of the 'elite')

Rob

Edited by Rob Ryder, 01 April 2011 - 18:42.

[beighes]

Being a not nearly employed enough illustrator, I am concerned with copyright issues. That's the reason & do not have anything online. It is too easy for anyone to save an image, enlarge, crop, remove watermarks, add changes & do what they want with them.

Rather than argue this, here is what the man states on his website ( http://www.schlegelm...?page=copyright )

"Copyright © Schlegelmilch

All rights reserved.

Any form of reproduction, in whole or in part, of photography, text, illustrations, buttons or any other element of this website is generally not permitted.
Every usage for business purposes, if on printed matter or online, has to be cleared out with us before usage and requires a written agreement (usually together with a cost estimate for the usage fee) from our office.

Due to a contracted agreement with the FOM we cannot allow usage of our photos “for free” or “license free” on any other websites. We regret this step but we fully understand and support the concerns of the authority who grants us access to the racetracks.
We do not allow linking to any files on our server except for our HTML or PHP files. Linking directly to the pictures on the server steals bandwidth and is very inconsiderate. If you want to link to the pages on Schlegelmilch.com, link to the main page or any html file in the directory so that the site gains attention and visibility on the web. Thank you very much for your fairness and understanding!"

This may be the only part that can be reproduced without fear. Threads like this may, someday, attract DCI Copyright.

Steve

Edited by beighes, 01 April 2011 - 18:58.

[D-Type]

So you mean that, if got a picture of Reutemann from Schlegelmilch, picture that his has posted, watermarked an all, picture that, in order to see it in a moderated but better size you have to click on, with his name on it and ready to copy to my PC, and in not possible way may be confused with with anyone else´s work(remember: name and watermark) and I want to post it here, copyright and all, saying ¡hey, look at this!
¿That is not possible?
Man, he surely has an army of lawyers working 24/7 taking 90% of the site owners to court.

It isn't Schlegelmich, it is what the law of copyright says.

If someone writes a book or an article or a piece of music, the copyright belongs to him and you may not reproduce it without his permission. Do you agree with that? Or, do you believe that once it something has been published anyone else is free to copy it and to publish it? Do you believe that it is ok to photocopy a book or do you think it is illegal? Do you believe that an author is entitled to be paid for his work? If you write a song and perform it somewhere, do you believe that it is wrong for someone to take your song, record it and have a number 1 with it, without paying you a cent?
Why should photos be any different?

[David McKinney]

Dhango, you must realise that this is TNF and rules apply.

It is OK to scan numerous entry lists from books/magazines and post here.
It is OK to scan as many cutaway drawings as you like and post here.
It is OK to scan part or whole race reports from magazines and post here.
It is OK to scan old motoring adverts from magazines and post here.

These will not even get a mention....

You do not however post photos unless own or have copyright permission (or you have over 1,000,000 previous posts and are classed as one of the 'elite')

Rob

It is definitely not OK to scan race reports or cutaway drawings from books/magazines. Just because they're not photographs doesn't mean they're copyright-free. Entry-lists are borderline - whoever formatted them (digitally or otherwise) can claim copyright, though the data itself is not copyright (if you're still with me)

Strictly speaking, advertisements are also copyright, but the difference is the advertiser is unlikely to care if you give him free publicity

And, for the unmpteenth time of saying, TNF has nothing to do with it. It's the law

[philippe7]

David, although I'm not a native speaker, and some subtelties of the english language might be lost on me, I have that feeling that Rob was being slightly tongue-in-cheek in his post....hence the reference to "the elite with 1 million posts" ....

But maybe I'm wrong

[Roger Clark]

It is definitely not OK to scan race reports or cutaway drawings from books/magazines. Just because they're not photographs doesn't mean they're copyright-free. Entry-lists are borderline - whoever formatted them (digitally or otherwise) can claim copyright, though the data itself is not copyright (if you're still with me)

Strictly speaking, advertisements are also copyright, but the difference is the advertiser is unlikely to care if you give him free publicity

And, for the unmpteenth time of saying, TNF has nothing to do with it. It's the law

I think the point Rob was making, and if not I will make it, is that there seems to be a lot more concern on TNF about copyright law in relation to photographs than any other material.

[Allen Brown]

It's a good point Roger and I have never really understood the cutaway drawings thread. I guess that because Tony posts his own drawings there, a different attitude has developed. But you're right that it's utterly inconsistent.

I think the distinction with entry lists, classified adverts and even with some photographs is that we're using them for our research and therefore they fall within UK copyright law provision for research and private study. The exact legal terms (for the UK, where this forum is based and where ORC is based) are here: http://www.legislati...8/48/section/29 and http://www.legislati...gulation/9/made

So I can even get away with cropping a picture of a Cooper T45 to show an unusual coil spring rear suspension arrangement or line up two pictures of Lightning Indy cars to show differences in fuel fillers because it's clearly for research. But even then I try to get permission because it's simply good manners.

It is difficult to stay within these bounds and I'm aware that when I'm writing a history for a customer and am being paid for it, it is no longer non-commercial. Also I take a different approach to sharing with bona fide researchers than I do to sharing with the whole web via ORC or TNF.

Because copying music has become such common practice, some people have got the impression that what they are doing is not actually breaking a law. It is of course.

[Rob Ryder]

I think the point Rob was making, and if not I will make it, is that there seems to be a lot more concern on TNF about copyright law in relation to photographs than any other material.

Exactly Roger... inconsistancy.

It also irks me that the 'copyright police' also seem to jump on new posters and ignore long standing members who are guilty of the same infringements.

Rob

[Giraffe]

And, for the unmpteenth time of saying, TNF has nothing to do with it. It's the law

I try not to (though I have been an occasional offender..... ) copy and post any form of material on the forum that may breach copyright purely to avoiding offending and upsetting other TNFers, professionally or otherwise. However whilst I recognise that it may be strictly illegal, it is quite unenforceable. A case could be brought at considerable cost but unless you could establish a substantial pecuniary loss as a result of the breach, either a) no lawyer would take your case on, or b) the case would either be dismissed or nominal damages awarded without costs, rendering such action fiscally untenable.
As one prominent photographer & TNFer said to me recently "I fear that the battle is already lost too."

[David McKinney]

With regret, I'm inclined to agree with your last sentence

But not the rest. Try posting a photo from one of the archives owned by people with considerable resources behind them, and see if they don't sue you, and autosport.com, for whatever figure they like to dream up.

It's not a matter of their having incurred pecuniary loss, though I suspect they would argue that, on the basis of potential future sales. It's simply a breach of the laws of copyright, which is nothing less than theft

The "no lawyer would take on your case" actually applies better to the person trying to defend their theft of someone else's property

[Allen Brown]

The big French archive whose name escapes me for the moment simply sends you an invoice and then follows up with lawyers if you don't pay. I think they start at €1400 per image used and then negotiate down (a little). The lawyer may be on a cut of the €1400 which will give them suitable motivation to pursue the case. As the infringer rarely has a legal leg to stand on, the best policy is to remove the image, apologise profusely and hope you can bring them down to an affordable sum.

And all websites will have something in the terms and conditions of their hosting contract about not hosting copyright material. If the lawyer includes the website's hosting company in the action, they will simply take down the whole site if they don't see the site owner taking appropriate action.

Most copyright owners simply take the approach of a polite but firm message to the site owner asking for the content to be removed and that nearly always works. Facebook is easier still as there's a button you can use to report any image and one of the options is reporting it for breach of copyright.

Whoever thinks the battle is lost needs to stiffen their resolve. Just because you're outnumbered, doesn't mean you're bound to lose.

[Giraffe]

Are there any examples of such actions going to court, Alan? I can find nothing in Hansards to date. A copyright holder could ask for any sum he cares to from an infringer, but when images are peddled commercially for a few quid on a daily basis, it is hard to imagine a court demanding a large payout for the mis-use of an image.
Re. Facebook, I could direct you to many a gallery with literally dozens of famous copyrighted images within.

[Phil Rainford]

The big French archive whose name escapes me for the moment simply sends you an invoice and then follows up with lawyers if you don't pay. I think they start at €1400 per image used and then negotiate down (a little). The lawyer may be on a cut of the €1400 which will give them suitable motivation to pursue the case. As the infringer rarely has a legal leg to stand on, the best policy is to remove the image, apologise profusely and hope you can bring them down to an affordable sum.

Are you talking about Getty Images Allen?

I can talk from experience ( business ) that these guys demand their pound of flesh if someone takes one of their images without their consent


PAR

[Alan Cox]

Are there any examples of such actions going to court, Allen? I can find nothing in Hansards to date.

Not sure why Court judgements would appear in Hansard.

[Giraffe]

Not sure why Court judgements would appear in Hansard.

Probably why I couldn't find them Alan.....
Are there any examples of people being penalised by the courts? Personally, I see the self-policing policy as seen on TNF as the most effective solution to the issue.

Edited by Giraffe, 02 April 2011 - 20:25.

[Allen Brown]

It's a French agency - four-letter acronym like APPI or something. Like Getty they just charge their standard published rate. If the case went to court it would be small claims court. Probably happens all the time. The judge might well take a dim view of it not being settled before it got to him and the offender might not be treated gently.

["Shangry-La"]

It's a French agency - four-letter acronym like APPI or something. Like Getty they just charge their standard published rate. If the case went to court it would be small claims court. Probably happens all the time. The judge might well take a dim view of it not being settled before it got to him and the offender might not be treated gently.

You are thinking of DPPI.

[eldougo]

Gunnar spent his F1 career at Lotus (Image source: unknown - photo reproduced in the spirit of ‘fair use’).

I found this on a web site it had lots of pics with this attached underneath......Very strange.
Strange copy right acknowledgment.

Edited by eldougo, 03 April 2011 - 06:46.

[Giraffe]

http://www.dppi.net/...47b664bd8103fd6

http://www.templeton.../copymyths.html

Edited by Giraffe, 03 April 2011 - 06:47.

[David McKinney]

Thanks, Tony

The second link supports what those of us who are considered to be spoilsport party-pooper enjoyment-destroying copyright police have always said

The point should be made however that, by and large, he's talking US law, which will not in all cases apply internationally. BUT SIMILAR LAWS WILL APPLY IN OTHER COUNTRIES

[ensign14]

Probably why I couldn't find them Alan.....
Are there any examples of people being penalised by the courts? Personally, I see the self-policing policy as seen on TNF as the most effective solution to the issue.

Not aware of any. But then again the main remedy would be an injunction to stop someone using the photo, rather than damages. You'd only normally seek damages if someone was using your photo to make money.

[Roger Clark]

Thanks, Tony

The second link supports what those of us who are considered to be spoilsport party-pooper enjoyment-destroying copyright police have always said

The point should be made however that, by and large, he's talking US law, which will not in all cases apply internationally. BUT SIMILAR LAWS WILL APPLY IN OTHER COUNTRIES

Under the Berne Convention, of course.

A summary of UK law can be found here. http://www.copyright...k_copyright_law

[Gosfield54]

Under the Berne Convention, of course.

A summary of UK law can be found here. http://www.copyright...k_copyright_law

Since I joined the Forum, I might as well add my 3pennyworth.
My era was the 1968-70s when F2 was at its peak.
I always remember as a schoolboy the mysterious Giancarlo Naddeo who I thought was a F2 driver but was wandering round in F3.
Then I remembered it was Enzo Corti!
I can still see the Tecno and BMW cars and among the drivers I loved were guys with names that took me far away from Liverpool and double maths: Xavier Perrot, Hubert Hahne, Bernd Terbeck and the odd (facial appearance) Peter Westbury with his beard.
Who could forget Tino Brambilla and Bill Ivey?
Perhaps the most 'famous' and mysterious driver to me was Jonathan Williams. An Englishman associated with Ferrari and yet so unkown among the general populace. In the last 1960 it was something that entranced me. Derek Bell may have wandered in after JW, but he was as impressive to a 14 year old schoolboy!

Edited by Gosfield54, 05 April 2011 - 12:30.

[paulhooft]

I have this 1984 book called:

Drive it! The complete book of Formula 2 Motor racing by Tristan Wood.

It covers Formula 2 racing.
There are some inexpensive second hand copies on ABEBooks
Paul Hooft

Edited by paulhooft, 06 April 2011 - 14:16.

[Bondurand]

Dhango, you must realise that this is TNF and rules apply.

It is OK to scan numerous entry lists from books/magazines and post here.
It is OK to scan as many cutaway drawings as you like and post here.
It is OK to scan part or whole race reports from magazines and post here.
It is OK to scan old motoring adverts from magazines and post here.

These will not even get a mention....

You do not however post photos unless own or have copyright permission (or you have over 1,000,000 previous posts and are classed as one of the 'elite')

Rob

Rules are made to be respected within the area they are meant to apply.

Wasn't there a rule about respecting the topic name? This one seems to have gone far away from formula 2

Edited by Bondurand, 06 April 2011 - 15:30.

[Alan Cox]

Wasn't there a rule about respecting the topic name? This one seems to have gone far away from formula 2

I think that convention went by the board some time ago, Philippe.

[paulhooft]

SO: Back to Formula TWO!

As I wrote today:

I have this 1984 book called:

Drive it! The complete book of Formula 2 Motor racing by Tristan Wood.

It covers Formula 2 racing.
There are some inexpensive second hand copies on ABEBooks
Even if this book is not the definitive work on Formula 2 it is a good beginning, and not expensive..

Paul Hooft

[David McKinney]

What period does it cover?

[paulhooft]

What period does it cover?

mostly 1967 to 1970's
For it's nice price it is a nice book..,
with some nice pictures...
Paul Hooft

Edited by paulhooft, 06 April 2011 - 18:59.

[rateus]

mostly 1967 to 1970's
For it's nice price it is a nice book..,
with some nice pictures...
Paul Hooft

I have it as well and I'd second Paul's recommendation as a basic summary of F2 during the European Championship years to 1983 - nothing as detailed as race results or points tables, but overviews of each season and a fair bit on the contemporary (ie. 1983) F2 scene. Not worth serious money but a decent stab at an often-overlooked subject - are there any other books that cover this era of F2?

iirc Haynes (the publisher) also produced a 'Drive It!' book on Formula Ford at the same time.

[ghinzani]

SO: Back to Formula TWO!

As I wrote today:

I have this 1984 book called:

Drive it! The complete book of Formula 2 Motor racing by Tristan Wood.

It covers Formula 2 racing.
There are some inexpensive second hand copies on ABEBooks
Even if this book is not the definitive work on Formula 2 it is a good beginning, and not expensive..

Paul Hooft

Thanks Paul - someone swiped my copy so its time to replace. I also have the Drive It books on Long Circuit Karting and BMX (which Grant would probably like to have!!)

[Dhango]

SO: Back to Formula TWO!

As I wrote today:

I have this 1984 book called:

Drive it! The complete book of Formula 2 Motor racing by Tristan Wood.

It covers Formula 2 racing.
There are some inexpensive second hand copies on ABEBooks
Even if this book is not the definitive work on Formula 2 it is a good beginning, and not expensive..

Paul Hooft

I wish we're to back to Formula 2. This thing went out of proportion, with accusations, reprimends, law exhibitions, and on and on and on. ¿Can we go back to the beginning, PLEASE? I promise I won't talk anymore about copyrights, I promise not to publish no photos unless there's a link to it, I promise I'll try my best, I'll promise I'll keep them for my collection.
Now, people, ¿it'll be possible, by any chance, that we go back to the premise of this thread? All I need is somebody with the will to share some color photos of Formula 2 cars. '67-'71 period is fine but early photos up to the '50s will make it too and later years up to the end of the formula will be fine too.

Edited by Dhango, 16 April 2011 - 13:42.

[paulhooft]

I have it as well and I'd second Paul's recommendation as a basic summary of F2 during the European Championship years to 1983 - nothing as detailed as race results or points tables, but overviews of each season and a fair bit on the contemporary (ie. 1983) F2 scene. Not worth serious money but a decent stab at an often-overlooked subject - are there any other books that cover this era of F2?

iirc Haynes (the publisher) also produced a 'Drive It!' book on Formula Ford at the same time.

I Have the Long circuit Karting book too, but never saw the Formula Ford one..
a pity..
and I found this one:

Author: Grant Gregor
Title: Formula 2

it is from 1953 or 1954..
Could not resist buying it
as it was only around $ 12....
on ABEBOOKS.

Paul

[paulhooft]

I recieved the book today:
It is from back in January 1953
128 pages 17 x 22 cm and 27 photographs
The book covers F2, racingseasons 1947 to 1952, and the cars that were raced then.
It's a nice period piece..
Paul Hooft

I Have the Long circuit Karting book too, but never saw the Formula Ford one..
a pity..
and I found this one:

Author: Grant Gregor
Title: Formula 2

it is from 1953 or 1954..
Could not resist buying it
as it was only around $ 12....
on ABEBOOKS.

Paul

Edited by paulhooft, 26 April 2011 - 17:08.