No, not really– just making a funny on this picture, which accompanied the annarbor.com article “Eastern Michigan fans hold out hope that coach Ron English can turn program around despite loss to UM.” I didn’t see any the game unfortunately, but I did enjoy a beautiful day of golf, perhaps my last of the season (we shall see). Anyway, how was it? Any EMUTalk-ers there?
I wasn’t at the game, but did watch a lot of it on t.v. EMU held tough the first half. But what is very common in collegiate games when a bigger, stronger team plays a team not as big/strong happened the 2nd half. EMU wore down and UM pulled far, far away. I haven’t seen an injury update report on the EMU QB, as in the 2nd half he went back to pass and his knee gave (no one hit him). It was officially ruled a sack, but it wasn’t an injury caused by a hit. Fortunately, EMU has next week off. Now…anyone know how softball did vs Notre Dame this week-end?
I noticed that on the EMU homepage today/this evening that they are featuring pictures from Saturday’s game. Of course, they don’t mention the score….
Compared to last time we played them, I think we did a lot better. We held our ground until Schmitt went out. We came back strong against NW in the latter part of the game, so I hold hope for the team under Ron English if Schmitt stays healthy.
Schmitt is out for the year with a torn ACL
I was there; the team looked much better than last time they played at the big house. I did feel a bit bad for our cheerleaders cheering to a large section of UoM fans with only a scattering of EMU folks in the crowd. And good ol’ Swoop was taunted the entire game by a fan calling him “Chicken.”
As a working photog, I’m pretty peeved you would appropriate someone else’s photograph for your blog.
I understand you’re not getting rich off this effort, but you do have an amazon link, and probably get a few cents through clicks.
Unfortunately, a lot of photographers are being put out of business as the Internet drives the cost of putting up an image down to zero.
How would you feel if the ownership of your academic research was routinely flouted?
anon:
First off, I make no money off of this site. None. I have tried some fund raisers in the past and will try some in the future, but I have yet to make any money from the amazon.com link, and the google ads I ran were essentially a bust. Here’s a post from the past about all of this. BTW, it costs a little less than $100 a year to run this site, so my capital needs are modest to say the least.
Second, note that I a) am not presenting this photo as if it were mine, and b) I give a link back to where the article appeared. In other words, I’ve cited my sources here, which is the main difference between participating in the academic conversation and giving credit where credit is due and plagiarism or “appropriating” someone else’s photograph.
Frankly, if you want to complain about professional photographers being put out of business, I’d complain to annarbor.com Both the photographer and the writer are James Dickson; back in “the day,” The Ann Arbor News would have certainly had a photographer and a reporter on the scene, which suggests to me that perhaps they are the ones who didn’t hire a working photographer.
The tickets that EMU received from Uof M were scattered all over the stadium, in and amongst UofM fans. There was not way we could have had a “sea of green” with he way tickets were distributed.
Look sitedad, providing a link to annarbor.com is great.
But I’m not sure why you think you can just reproduce the photo on your blog.
Frankly, it doesn’t matter whether you claim it as yours or not. It is not yours. The news outlet owns the photo and the copyright. The law forbids any reproduction without obtaining a license. I doubt annarbor.com cares, but there is a principle involved. People treat digital information as if it is free. It may be nearly free to transmit, but it is not free to create.
Very bad news about Schmitt’s ACL injury!
I don’t want to get into a debate about what is or isn’t fair use of an image, what licensing is or isn’t required, etc. But it’s complicated, certainly much more complicated than a “this is wrong, and that is right” sort of response.
Technically speaking, what I’ve done here is provide a link to the image– that is, I haven’t “taken” it but inserted the code to make it show up on the page. And just to make it even more complicated: because of the way the web works, every time you visit a site– annarbor.com, NYTimes.com, whatever– you download a copy of what you are looking at. In effect, every view of anything on the web is a potential copyright violation, especially if you want to stick to the idea that users need a license for everything.
If someone from annarbor.com contacted me to take down the image, I of course would. And as far as I can tell by browsing through annarbor.com’s “user agreement,” I don’t think linking to articles and images is something they see as wrong.