Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Well.. no more Porsche on Dieselstation
Dieselstation Car Forums > Forum Issues > Issues & Suggestions
Pages: 1, 2
Diesel
I guess i didn't see the first email they sent me back in March.. so i got a second email today. Well.. this just sucks. I guess i kinda knew one day one of these manufacturers would come calling.. i dunno.. just sucks! And yeah.. i checked the mail headers. seems legit.



QUOTE
Laura Malone

03/15/2006 11:13 AM

To: diesel@dieselstation.com
Subject: Use of Porsche Photographs

Dear Sir or Madam:

It has been brought to our attention that you are displaying numerous photographs owned by Porsche Cars North America and Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG (collectively, Porsche ), on the website you maintain at www.dieselstation.com for reproduction and distribution. As you are likely aware, Porsche is the owner of the copyrights in the photographs Porsche distributes including, all of the photographs contained on Porsche's website. The fact that you are not charging money and asking for donations is irrelevant to copyright infringement. Your unauthorized reproduction and distribution of Porsche's photographs is a clear violation of Porsche's exclusive rights under Section 106 of the U.S. Copyright Act and as such, constitutes copyright infringement under Section 501 of the Act. If a court were to find that your unauthorized reproduction and distribution of Porsche's photographs is a violation of Section 501 of the U.S. Copyright Act, Porsche is entitled to recover from you its actual damages as well as any profits that you have generated in connection with such infringing activities (i.e., paid advertisements on your website). Furthermore, the court may order the destruction of all copies that have been made in violation of Porsche's exclusive rights including all masters, tapes and other articles by which such copies may be reproduced.

In addition, you are displaying photographs of automobiles in the top quarter of your website and the photograph changes to a PORSCHE® 911® automobile. Such use of our trade dress is a violation of our trademark rights. The shape of the PORSCHE® 911® automobile is a federally registered trademark with the US Patent and Trademark Office. Furthermore, the law is well settled that Porsche has protectable trade dress rights in the distinctive shapes of its automobiles. Liquid Glass Enterprises, Inc., v. Dr. Ing. h.c.F. Porsche AG and Porsche Cars North America, Inc. 8 F.Supp. 2d 398 (D.N.J. 1998). In Liquid Glass, Judge Barry preliminarily enjoined Liquid Glass from using photographs of a PORSCHE 911 in its advertisements for car care products "because Liquid Glass wanted to usurp Porsche's reputation and strength and persuade consumers that Liquid Glass produces high quality products. Stated somewhat differently, Liquid Glass wanted to cash in on the good will that Porsche has worked hard to create and maintain by aligning itself with Porsche."
Diesel
more:

QUOTE
Because it is possible that you were unaware of the significant liability you would incur as a result of your unauthorized reproduction and distribution of Porsche's photographs, Porsche is willing to forego any claim of damages if you provide us with written confirmation by April 15, 2006 that you have removed all of the Porsche photographs from your website (i.e., all photographs that originated from Porsche) and that you agree not to subsequently reproduce and/or distribute any photographs owned by Porsche without the express written permission of Porsche.

However, if we do not receive a response from you or if you are unwilling to comply with our requests, Porsche will pursue all available legal remedies, including an award of damages. Therefore, if you wish to settle this matter amicably, please provide us with your written assurance, that you have complied with our requests.


Sincerely,
Laura Malone
Trademark Paralegal
Diesel
email headers for those interested:

QUOTE
X-Gmail-Received: f887fafbb363bb4dfea01f85575518311ecee13c
Delivered-To: diesel@dieselstation.com
Received: by 10.64.112.5 with SMTP id k5cs512200qbc;
Tue, 3 Oct 2006 12:10:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.70.32.10 with SMTP id f10mr9490493wxf;
Tue, 03 Oct 2006 12:10:21 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <LMalone@porschecars.com>
Received: from mailout07.fw.porsche.us (mailout07.fw.porsche.us [63.238.30.146])
by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id h17si6325747wxd.2006.10.03.12.10.21;
Tue, 03 Oct 2006 12:10:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 63.238.30.146 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of LMalone@porschecars.com)
Received: from atlnotes1.porschecars.com (atlnotes1.porschecars.com [205.219.196.12])
by atinagw1.fw.porsche.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EE0930017
for <diesel@dieselstation.com>; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 19:10:21 +0000 (UTC)
To: diesel@dieselstation.com
Subject: Use of Porsche Photographs
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.10 March 22, 2002
Message-ID: <OFC0913644.A38903F6-ON852571FC.0067FEEC-852571FC.0069511D@porschecars.com>
From: LMalone@porschecars.com
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 15:10:20 -0400
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on AtlNotes1/PCNA(Release 7.0.1|January 17, 2006) at 10/03/2006
03:10:21 PM,
Serialize complete at 10/03/2006 03:10:21 PM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0069510D852571FC_="

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--=_alternative 0069510D852571FC_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear Sir or Madam,

We have once again reviewed your Internet website. Please immediately=20
comply with the requests set forth in our letter sent on March 15, 2006.=20
We would appreciate your response before November 3, 2006. If we do not=20
receive a response prior to this date we will retain outside legal counsel =

to pursue all legal remedies available to us.

Sincerely,
Laura Malone
Cyclone
QUOTE
Porsche is willing to forego any claim of damages if you provide us with written confirmation by April 15, 2006 that you have removed all of the


em, yeah.
trail_boss2
You should find out if Goatse is part of their copywrights.
z0ne


Suck it, Porsche.
Windshield
Why would they pass up on the free publicity?
idiot
QUOTE(Windshield @ Oct 4 2006, 12:05 AM) *
Why would they pass up on the free publicity?


because dieselstation has those "high-res" pictures that people can use for other purposes tongue.gif
Easton
I was hoping this WASN'T going to be the case, when I saw the title of this thread.

Turns out to be, it was what I had feared most when I read the thread title sad.gif

This sucks big time, and it's PORSCHE too. Which weighs enormously.. they have so many cars, and beautiful photography.
moe
It's okay we can just be like Gran Turismo. Use Rufs.
bing5500
This sucks the big one...
herkalees
Lets all stop buying Porsches as a way of saying "we don't like you anymore, now where did I leave my rolex?".

:shifty2:
Tirminyl
As a result of their action, I have sold my 997 Turbo, 996 GT2 and cancelled my order for the 997 GT3.
Boxster17
That really sucks, I love the pictures they take.
Synesthesia
Wow, well this blows.

QUOTE(Cyclone @ Oct 3 2006, 11:14 PM) *
em, yeah.


Yeah, is that October 15, 2006 or April 15, 2007, or what? Obviously, April 15, 2006 is wrong...
Boxster17
Well look at when the e-mail was sent....then it makes sense
Dr. Strangelove
Wait... You can't show the pictures that they took, I understand that. But you can't use any pics of any Porsche?
Flaw
Dude, I was just discussing this with Donny on irc the other day. I asked him when it's legal to use the pictures of these cars for your own website, and when it's copyright infringement. He said as long as you're not charging for it, it's fine to use it, but I kept wondering if I can just take part of an image and use it on a banner for a personal site....I guess this answers that D:

It just really sucks that they killed your ability to give out their pictures just because you used it in your banner(s).

Does this mean you have to change all the banners that have the "dieselstation; fuel for your desktop" watermark? Maybe I'm still not understanding this copyright shit completely.

You can always rar them all up and give us links in the #DS topic =D? Although, it would kill your bandwidth if the rars were too large. Then again there's like 10 of us on irc rishi
350Z
Isn't the porsche in the banner a gemballa? I didn't realise they had copyright of that too.
leif
Thay whole part about the shape of the 911 being copyrighted is kinda weird...obviously the porsche legal department was having a slow year.

and as far as the thing FS said about it not being a problem if you don't make money...Diesel does make money from DS...and in a way is profiting from the shape of the 911.

Does this mean that you cant post pics of any 911? like even ones that guys like Laurens and Easton shoot and post?
idiot
QUOTE(leif @ Oct 4 2006, 08:30 PM) *
Thay whole part about the shape of the 911 being copyrighted is kinda weird...obviously the porsche legal department was having a slow year.

and as far as the thing FS said about it not being a problem if you don't make money...Diesel does make money from DS...and in a way is profiting from the shape of the 911.

Does this mean that you cant post pics of any 911? like even ones that guys like Laurens and Easton shoot and post?


I think the problem is that those Porsche pictures that Diesel has are taken by Porsche. I think the ones taken by other individuals (like Easton) are not own by Porsche, unlike those "media pass" pictures.
Asher
Bastards.
moe
As long as the photos don't belong to Porsche he's okay. I don't understand the shape part though. Does that give them the right to say you can't use Porsche images at all? Like what about Gemballas, Rufs, or even photos of regular Porsches by Easton or someone else?
arnge
Wait a min.

they said u can't have the pics on your sire.


but is it ok to link to another site ?

i will make a site fill it with porsche pics.

and will withstand any legal claims.
GreyGhost
I work with many clients that sell Porsche cars and accessories and they are really quite crazy about protecting their brand. I understand it to an extent but when they destroy the spirit of excitment about images that promote their brand it seems quite silly to me.

Ah... what are ya gonna do?
GreyGhost
I have gotten around this problem by taking my own images and stating that these are owner's cars, by name, in the advertisements.
Mr b00st
for gosh sake i dont' think you should be so polite about it Diesel.

how about on the front page "Links removed per request of Porsche. Fuck you, Porsche."

Seriously!
leif
You could post the text of the letter...that kinda attitude is bad PR for the company...especially one like Porsche, who has such a broad spectrum of clients.

In addition to that a letter, telling them how disapointed you are that a company like porsche would resort to big time legal mumbo-jumbo for something as minor as providing fans of the company with free images, might give them something to think about...it probaly wont change their minds...but would probaly tell the asshole legal department of Porsche NA what you think of them.

In-fact I think I'm gonna write a letter to Excellence (the North American Porsche Magazine). Hopefully it gets published, and lets north american porsche owners know what dicks Porsche North America can be.

I still love the company...but I'm a little disapointed in their attitude towards this.
mopho
Porsche has every right to make you remove the photo as they own the images (if they bought all the rights from the photographer, if not, the photographer owns them) and it is their choice as to what is done with the images. Usually when the car companies post high resolution images on their websites, the intended use for them is to be picked up by magazines (and other news sources) for editorial use only. Wallpapers, banner ads or design elements are not considered editorial, even if they are not being distributed for money. Wallpapers are, as stated, an unauthorized distribution and are high res enough that they can be used for other purposes, such as print (which is why I don't give away wallpapers of my work). By giving away wallpapers you are possibly also undermining the photographers ability to resell the images. I know I would be upset as well if I discovered you were using my images without my permission.
Just because something is on the internet, does not mean it is free for the taking.

As for the trademark claim, that is where it gets sketchy as there has not been a lot law written in this kind of case. The point of a trademark is to keep people from copying the object's design, i.e. re-creating a similar object or design, it does not include photographic copies. There was a lawsuit, Chuck Gentile vs Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, where the RRHoF tried to sue the photographer when he made a poster of their building, claiming that the buildings likeness was trademarked. Initially the RRHoF won the case, but it was later overturned ( I think it went to the Supreme Court) in favor of the photographer. There has been a few other cases as well that ruled in favor of the photographer.
The problem is that Porsche could still sue and tie you up in litigation that would likely bring you to your knees. That is why, technically, you really don't need a property release when shooting an object, but it is usually best to get one if you can.
leif
um...on the porsche website they are distributed as wallpapers.

If I remember correctly, porsche has a seaperate, log-in/log-out site for press photographs, someone on DS atcually had access to it once.
mopho
QUOTE(leif @ Oct 5 2006, 02:35 PM) *
um...on the porsche website they are distributed as wallpapers.

If I remember correctly, porsche has a seaperate, log-in/log-out site for press photographs.



That still does not mean that someone can take them and redistribute them on a different website without Porsches (or the photographers) permission
leif
no, but I was more ticked off by the "we also noticed you had some images of the 911 on your banner...the shape of the 911 is copywrighted..."
mopho
Mainly scare tactics, if they are not Porsches images being used, they can't really stop it. But DS's owner should consult a lawyer before taking a chance
LeChatMaigre
QUOTE(z0ne @ Oct 4 2006, 06:05 AM) *

LOL ...

angel.gif
moe
Uhhh...wtf?
porsche944
^^ Best picture ever. Diesel send that jpeg to porsche and watch them try to not let you use their pictures anymore
Windshield
I don't get it.
Mr b00st
...me neither...
Pinecone
most fucked up picture l've ever seen
SirZhukov
huh.gif k

QUOTE(moethepaki @ Oct 4 2006, 06:52 PM) *
It's okay we can just be like Gran Turismo. Use Rufs.


I could use a larger collection of Rufs.. smile.gif

A few months ago I had a website mainly about Porsche, and with the same faith I also received such a eMail. The press photos were in conjunction with my articles (I don't use press releases).

I was to upset, and then closed the site and domain. I'm starting on a new project. It's quite frustrating how Porsche is, there are a couple other Porsche sites that don't exist anymore.
is2scooby
That is demoralizing.
nismo
We can still use the sportec ones. =D
tune
If you're feeling risktaking can't you hide them on the website somewhere?
Dredge
They're selling their automobiles for 50K+, and they're worried about a few pictures on a mediocre viewed site? Well, Porsche just showed their true color.
clarkma5
Dieselstation's hardly mediocre o:

At least, in terms of views. It's pretty significant.
moe
I just realized NetCarShow doesn't have Porsche backgrounds either...well not official ones.
Dredge
QUOTE(clarkma5 @ Nov 17 2006, 08:09 PM) *
Dieselstation's hardly mediocre o:

At least, in terms of views. It's pretty significant.


It's mediocre compared to most of the major sites, making DS a mediocre viewed site.
infinity
Dude that sentence straight up sucks. DS is by no means mediocre, as a site or number of views. Go play with yourself in your Xterra.
fiber optic
QUOTE(Dredge @ Nov 18 2006, 12:20 PM) *
It's mediocre compared to most of the major sites, making DS a mediocre viewed site.


Pack your bags, you're moving to Lonely-town.
Ferm
"April 15, 2006"

Why post this so late then?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2018 Invision Power Services, Inc.