I came across this news item this morning. I thought some of you might be interested. Alan.http://www.zwnews.com/issuefull.cfm?ArticleID=13576

That guy looks familiar, is it Widowmaker416?

Here's a related topic where the same news article is discussed Related Article

Regards,

Terry

Yep, that's Widowmaker alright. He shot that giraffe while I was there, only he was hunting at Buffalo Range and I was hunting 30 minutes away in the Save.

Here's the photo that accompanied the Newsweek article.


An American woman with a leopard shot in August, 2003 during a Buffalo Range Safari in Zimbabwe


Widowmaker416 made the second page of the Newsweek article.



An American on a 2005 Buffalo Range Safari in Zimbabwe

Regards,

Terry

quote:

That guy looks familiar, is it Widowmaker416?

Yep, that's me Terry! A very proud hunter with Buffalo Range Safaris, Brothers Barry and Rob Styles!!!!
And I just read that article, beleive me, I'm sick and upset! I hunted on 6 safaris with the Styles, all but one at Buffalo Range Ranch (Private owned) in southern Zim. And yes there was alot of squaters there but the hunting was still good. The Giraffe was taken there this past May.

Sorry Guys. I missed the related article. I am hoping to get back to Zim next year. I hunt with Jannie Meyer and I plan on getting an update from him when he is here for SCI/Dallas. This year, I'm off to SA for Plains Game. Alan.

Good to hear from you Alan, thanks for posting. jorge

Somebody's gonna have to wipe the leopard blood off that gal's shirt.

I'll volunteer if no one else does. She can thank me later.

Ok, it's time I step up and make my thoughts known about Buffalo Range Safaris and the Style Brothers, Barry and Rob, I've spent over 100 days with this crew! On the hunt in Zimbabwe and at my home in New Jersey, and they are welcomed at my home anytime! I consider them good friends, incredably hard workers, and top Professional Hunters. And I can tell you one thing, Both brothers are a class act, you won't find a nicer more trust worthy company then BRS, I've been on 6 safaris with them,and plan on setting up a 7th safari with them at Reno! I have had nothing but great times, hell everyone of you AR members have seen my reports on safaris I went on with them! this 5 star company goes back over 50 years, have built a impeccable reputation as a world class safari company, they are very conservation minded, They keep very tight reins on their quota on animals, What they have done for conservation and hunting should be rewarded not treated like criminals!! This whole thing I conceder bull shit! As for their hunting in Matestsi, Jocelyn Chewinge was not on the list of sanctioned officials, when they were booking safaris there. they are booking hunts in their other areas of Zimbabwe. Which I plan to go on!
And my final thought, well for now, I'm sure I will have alot more to add to this, I believe in these two briothers and I will continue to go on safari with them as long as they will have my sorry ass!

Final thought! Don't even think about comparing Buffalo Range Safaris to Out of Africa! Barry and Rob hunt on their land, they take only their quota on that property, Very ethical hunters, they follow the law to the T, remember, this is not here say, I've been there I've done that enouph to know who this family is! They aren't even on the same page, no that's not true, their not even in the same book as OoA!

If anyone would like to talk with me about this outstanding safari company PM me, email me, call me, come visit me! I'm here!

Thank you!

quote:

Originally posted by T.Carr:


That guy looks familiar, is it Widowmaker416?

Widowmaker416

I would think that photo of yours is copyrighted and Newsweek would need your permission or the photographers to display it.

Good point Nitro!

I am the photographer and I don't give them permission!

But I will always stand next to my good friends in Zimbabwe!

[QUOTE]I am the photographer and I don't give them permission!
[QUOTE]

Yes, sue the bastards! They wouldn't hesitate to sue you if the shoe was on the other foot!

Definitely sue them, give them a taste of their own medicine. How can they post your pic in a very bad article demonizing American Hunters without permission. I bet they would just settle out of court.

Do we any AR lawyers out there that want a client?

This might help you out a bit. With the lawyer information anyway.

Letters to the Editor for the U.S. print edition: Letters@newsweek.com
Mailing Address:
Newsweek
251 W. 57th St.
New York, NY 10019

~I am not a lawyer, but I do read a lot of law books, and this was just some stuff that I came across. I was thinking this could be a letter that you could change around if you wanted to send something.
~(The second from the last line is a little B.S. since I did not write to you Widowmaker, but I thought this could be a start for a letter to Newsweek. I guess we could talk about this and then it wouldn't be BS.)
~Worst Case Scenario:
I feel that you could persue this, and at least get them to remove the pictures from their web site.

~Best Case Scenario:
Sue for Copyright Infringement:



Dear Newsweek Staff,

Recently you published an article "Shoot to Kill" by Joshua Hammer. On the website it shows a picture of a middle aged gentleman and a giraffe that was taken, I presume by him on a hunting trip. I had a question regarding this picture. Did you, or have you secured permission to use this picture from him or the outfitting company that he went on the hunting safari with. The outfitting company is actually a third party source that you have listed under the picture that the gentleman let use the picture for advertising purposes. Normally, with proper due process, one has to secure written or oral permission by the photgrapher of this photograph to reproduce or use this photo in printed, or copyrighted material which this article is. The person in the picture is an aquatiance of mine, and after writing to him this evening, he has told me that he expressed no written or oral consent for Newsweek to use his picture in the publication. If you read the US Copyright Laws the law states:

Copyright protection subsists from the time the work is created in fixed form. The copyright in the work of authorship immediately becomes the property of the author who created the work. Only the author or those deriving their rights through the author can rightfully claim copyright.

Copyright Law Also Applies to these Works:

Copyright protects "original works of authorship" that are fixed in a tangible form of expression. The fixation need not be directly perceptible so long as it may be communicated with the aid of a machine or device. Copyrightable works include the following categories:

literary works;
musical works, including any accompanying words
dramatic works, including any accompanying music
pantomimes and choreographic works
pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works
motion pictures and other audiovisual works
sound recordings
architectural works
These categories should be viewed broadly. For example, computer programs and most "compilations" may be registered as "literary works"; maps and architectural plans may be registered as "pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works."

A Copy Right is Secured When:

Copyright Secured Automatically upon Creation
The way in which copyright protection is secured is frequently misunderstood. No publication or registration or other action in the Copyright Office is required to secure copyright. (See following Note.) There are, however, certain definite advantages to registration. See "Copyright Registration."

Copyright is secured automatically when the work is created, and a work is "created" when it is fixed in a copy or phonorecord for the first time. "Copies" are material objects from which a work can be read or visually perceived either directly or with the aid of a machine or device, such as books, manuscripts, sheet music, film, videotape, or microfilm. "Phonorecords" are material objects embodying fixations of sounds (excluding, by statutory definition, motion picture soundtracks), such as cassette tapes, CDs, or LPs. Thus, for example, a song (the "work") can be fixed in sheet music (" copies") or in phonograph disks (" phonorecords"), or both.

If a work is prepared over a period of time, the part of the work that is fixed on a particular date constitutes the created work as of that date.


Please contact me at the soonest possible date so we can discuss legal ramification of Newsweek's Usage of this Picture.

Sincerely,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


They might say that they are legal to use this picture under section 107 of the Copyright Law which states:

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include —

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.


~I feel that you might be able to get around this if Newsweek did not contact the safari operators for use of this picture or you in anyway. Its a large gray area....... At least they would remove your picture unless you really want to be on the front of NEWSWEEK.