New Orleans Family

[Antiliar]

Americanmafia.com has permission, the photo was removed from Mafia Wiki, and I'll get to Pinterest later.

[Stroccos]

Americanmafia.com has permission, the photo was removed from Mafia Wiki, and I'll get to Pinterest later.

so your claiming to own a copyright on that photo?

[Antiliar]

A number of us researchers have created our own photo collections, which includes certain rights and responsibilities. John Binder, for example, has a very large collection. If you want to use material from his collection, you pay him a fee and get his permission. The photos I used for my article were from my own collection.

[ledblimp]

So the picture you accused me of stealing, the one that OBVIOUSLY came from YOUR article is actually available on another website. And you expect that no one will ever use it? What other sites have permission? That's on par with those chicks that let their boyfriends take pics while banging them. "Naw babe, I'll never show anyone". Geezus!!

The ones Binder has put out are all over the place. He may have gotten paid initially, he don't no more. I suspect he's smart enough to know once it's out there he's lost control of it.

So you didn't answer the question, do you claim a copyright on it?

[Confederate]

The person who OWNS the copyright to any photo is the person who TOOK the photo.
I don't see how any researcher could possibly own the copyright to a photo he did not personally take.
He may own the copyright to a particular ARTICLE but he does not own the copyright to any picture USED in the article unless HE PERSONALLY TOOK THE PICTURE HIMSELF.

[Snakes]

In certain situations, you can also "own" a photo by possessing the original copy or negative.

[sdeitche]

The person who OWNS the copyright to any photo is the person who TOOK the photo.
I don't see how any researcher could possibly own the copyright to a photo he did not personally take.
He may own the copyright to a particular ARTICLE but he does not own the copyright to any picture USED in the article unless HE PERSONALLY TOOK THE PICTURE HIMSELF.

No actually even the photographer may not own the copyright, especially if he took the photo for a newspapers or news agency. That entity own the photo and copyright in some cases.

Mugshots are fair game. They are in the public domain by nature of their use (taken by a law enforcement agency). I purchased mugshots from the Hillsborough County Sheriff and put them online- now you can find them all over.

You can own the original photo and not own the copyright. In my books, there have been times when I've used photos that I've owned the original copy of, but the copyright was still with an agency- you note that in the credits and work with the publisher to make sure things are covered. I've also paid for use of photos, taken photos, used mugshots, used postcard images of cards I own (Excellent way to get historic 'photos' of old places).

One area this gets grey are photos that are from defunct news organizations, especially old ones. I don't know how exactly that works.

[sdeitche]

Antonino "Nino" LoScalzo
Born October 5 1943, died November 14 1975.
Info I have is that Marcello brought him over as a Zip though he had ties to the LoScalzo's in Tampa and was Made under Marcello. Not sure as to the circumstances of his early death or where he died but he's buried in Tampa in the same cemetery as Santo Trafficante.

He was the son of Angelo "The Hammer" LoScalzo and brother of Trafficante's alleged successor, VIncent LoScalzo. He died from leukemia.

[Villain]

I have to be honest and Ill admit it that i was maybe the first one on these forums who began taking pictures with my mobile phone from various newspaper articles and also books, hardcopy or just sample views posted on the net. I very rarely used them in my work but instead i posted them in the pics section. And the funny thing is that later i managed to find many of those same pics on various and famous blogs as if they were theirs lol...eventually in the end they all ended up on pinterest. Once i had this convo with Luzi i think, and the guy was absolutely right and he was very cool regarding the subject since the only thing he wanted was credit. But i was also right since later i think that he removed his sample views of his project from the net...smart guy but too late

[Stroccos]

A number of us researchers have created our own photo collections, which includes certain rights and responsibilities. John Binder, for example, has a very large collection. If you want to use material from his collection, you pay him a fee and get his permission. The photos I used for my article were from my own collection.

Well your collections don't mean you own the rights , in a nutshell yoi basically you did the same thing that your accusing this guy of doing . I don't really see the difference . When it comes to the photo it may be frustrating to see a photo you found or hunted for on pinterhurst etc by there is really no recourse . Except feeding some bullshit there way and watch them post of all over lol
I just put black hand on some of the photos But for some reason those people don't post those on pinterhurst .

[Angelo Santino]

For more information on photos and how they can be used here's a page that explains everything:
http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/copy ... ne-images/

I think the bigger gripe was less so the photo and more so Antiliar's published work not receiving credit. The photo simply confirmed that what's being shared now came from the original article.

[ledblimp]

Well, I guess no one should have a reason to trust my word but the fact is I never read the article and didn't copy it. Reading over the parts of his article that are used in the Dash blog, and to the best of my recollection, besides one alias and a couple of dates, I used one line about a prison sentence and I may have used a line about an attempted break in. Fact is that 98% of the info in the WHOLE blog entry is available elsewhere and a huge chunk of it in numerous places. I'm not sure how anyone can claim ownership of historical events and people, whether or not he did the original research and brought the events to light. Maybe the knowledge wasn't well known when he first wrote it but in the six years between when he wrote his and I wrote mine it got out there. Just as with his pic that was only available through his article but yet can be found in multiple sites (not to mention has made the rounds of FB pages) this info is out there, just have'ta dig for it a bit.

[ledblimp]

Antonino "Nino" LoScalzo
Born October 5 1943, died November 14 1975.
Info I have is that Marcello brought him over as a Zip though he had ties to the LoScalzo's in Tampa and was Made under Marcello. Not sure as to the circumstances of his early death or where he died but he's buried in Tampa in the same cemetery as Santo Trafficante.

He was the son of Angelo "The Hammer" LoScalzo and brother of Trafficante's alleged successor, VIncent LoScalzo. He died from leukemia.

Thanks for the info. Would you have any info that contradicts what I have on him about Marcello bringing him over?

[Villain]

Ledblimp this is a little bit off topic but have you ever came across any document regarding Marcellos and Giancanas one time conflict or dissagrement over something? Right now I cant find it since im not at home. The two families were very closely connected in the gambling and vending machine business, but above all narcotics

[sdeitche]

Antonino "Nino" LoScalzo
Born October 5 1943, died November 14 1975.
Info I have is that Marcello brought him over as a Zip though he had ties to the LoScalzo's in Tampa and was Made under Marcello. Not sure as to the circumstances of his early death or where he died but he's buried in Tampa in the same cemetery as Santo Trafficante.

He was the son of Angelo "The Hammer" LoScalzo and brother of Trafficante's alleged successor, VIncent LoScalzo. He died from leukemia.

Thanks for the info. Would you have any info that contradicts what I have on him about Marcello bringing him over?

The whole family came over together, I believe through NO then onto Tampa. I was never able to find out exactly why Nino remained in NOLA. However, the LoScalzos are from the same town in Sicily as the Trafficantes, and with the ties between Marcello and Trafficante, one theory is that Marcello bright them over as a favor to Trafficante. Actually not a theory, more of a wild-ass guess.