Monday, December 5, 2011
Hong Kong TVB Actress Toby Leung and Aaron Wong Wed
Toby, the daughter of famous TVB producer, Tommy Leung, wed her boyfriend, Aaron Wong, a businessman, last month. The newlyweds are set to hold their wedding banquet at InterContinental Hong Kong on Tuesday night, tonight, I suppose.
Toby Leung cries at hubby's love declaration. The 28-year-old recalled: "I'm very touched when he told me that, 'it's gotta be you'! At that moment I feel like I'm the happiest person in the world!"
Toby Leung officially married her boyfriend, Aaron Wong, on Nov 24.
The couple had earlier flown to Shanghai and Taiwan to take their wedding photographs. Below are three among the Wedding photos of Toby Leung released.
Toby, 28, first entered the music industry in 2004, and was a member of the disbanded Girls' Only Dormitory group. She later joined TVB and was given supporting roles in TV series.
Toby now owns a wedding planner company in Hong Kong and has plans to open a branch in Taiwan next year, and is working with a company to explore the market in China.
Aaron is a businessman specialising in luxury home investments. At only 32, he has earned the nickname of "The Property Investment King" and has assets estimated at HK$200mil (RM79.6mil).
Toby Leung's star-studded wedding
The bridesmaids included Charmaine Sheh, Janet Chow, Angela Tong, Natalie Tong, Florence Kwok, Margaret Chung and more.
Guests at the 53-table wedding banquet at InterContinental Hong Kong Hotel included TVB Chairwoman Mona Fong, new boss Chan Kwok Keung, Norman Leung, Stephen Chan and other executives. Toby’s wedding was surely a star-studded banquet as many artists attended including: Alan Tam, Nick Cheung, Louis Koo, Anita Yuen, Christine Ng, Michael Miu, Jamie Chik, Felix Wong, Nat Chan, Roger Kwok, Cindy Au, Michael Tse, Fala Chen, Raymond Lam, Charmaine Sheh, Tavia Yeung, Kate Tsui, Edwin Siu, Ron Ng, Kevin Cheng, Niki Chow, Amigo Chiu, Natalie Tong, Sharon Chan, Joyce Tang, Derek Kwok, Timmy Hung and many more. It was much more star-studded than the TVB Anniversary!
Image source of the four images above: Asiancrunch
View all images of Celebrity Guests
An earlier related article:
Toby and Aaron rumoured to wed next year. Aaron was said to have given Toby a two-karat engagement ring - worth some six figures.
Image source: The Daily Chilli
Congratulations to the bride and groom!
Sources:
- The Daily Chilli
- AsianCrunch
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Camera Goggles make great Christmas Gifts
Speaking from a layperson's point of view, I suppose with camera goggles, any novice can take pictures under the water although they may turn out a little less professional. What do you think?
Incidentally, Christmas is not too far away but enough time to make an order of such a camera if you are looking for such a gift for a photography enthusiast, be it family member or friend. He or she would be forever grateful for this hands-free camera which can be used for filming or taking digital images. He/she can go snorkeling, spearfishing, free-diving, or scuba diving with it. What fun!
Top Image source
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Monkey See, Monkey Do, Monkey get Copyright, too?
By now it’s all over the twittersphere, the blogosphere and every other made-up sphere on this green and blue sphere. The monkey that stole a photographer’s camera and got her pictures published in the Daily Mail.
Copyright experts and dilettantes alike are going ape trying to analyze who owns the copyright in these images. Why? Because the Daily Mail put a copyright notice on two of the pictures in its article. Most of the analyses I’ve seen are Americans trying to sort it out under American law, which is typical, but not necessary the best approach here. You see, the monkey is Indonesian. The work was made in Indonesia. The photographer who’s camera was taken and the agency claiming copyright ownership of the photos are British.
The main questions being discussed: Does the monkey get the copyright? If not, does anyone?
Monkey stole the camera from the camera man
Under Indonesian copyright law an author is “a person or some persons.” Miss Monkey is ruled out right there I’m afraid. But what about under British copyright law? Since it’s a British company claiming copyright, any suit is likely to be brought in the UK. Indonesia is a member of Berne and TRIPs, so the photos should be treated the same as UK works under UK copyright law. Unfortunately for the monkey, The UK copyright law also defines author as “the person.” Sorry monkey, it’s not you.
If not, then who?
It appears the monkey, by virtue of not being a “person,” cannot be the author of the photos. (…unless there’s a statute somewhere that makes monkeys a person the way corporations are made a person.) So who gets the copyright?
The photographer / Carters News
If the photographer did own the copyright, it appears that he transferred his rights to Caters News Agency Ltd based on the copyright notices on the newspaper photos.
There is a clause in Article 7 of the Indonesian copyright law that specifies if a work is designed by one person and worked out by another, then the one who designed the work gets the copyright. If the photographer had set up the shot and the monkey had just taken the photo, the photographer would likely have the copyright. But the photographer didn’t design anything here. He just left his camera. The monkey did all the designing in the photos, so this article shouldn’t apply.
Indonesia
Perhaps more useful here is Article 9, “If a legal entity announces that a work has originated from it without mentioning a person as the author, then the legal entity shall be deemed to be the author, unless proven otherwise.” The monkey took the photos in an Indonesian national park. The Indonesian government presumably owns that park and is a legal entity. It would seem that if the Indonesian government claimed it was the copyright owner, then it would be. Except for that “unless proven otherwise bit.” But this leads us to another question, does the park own the monkey?
If not having an author as defined under the copyright law is the same as having an unknown author, then Indonesia owns the copyright under Article 10A of the Indonesian copyright law.
No one
The main claim I’ve seen in the US discussions of who should own the copyright is that no one should; the photos should be in the public domain. And it appears, under UK copyright law, they’re right. - Now, this is the part where, knowing that there are a great deal of very knowledgeable UK copyright practitioners who read this blog and that the author is not one of them, the author asks for forgiveness and clarification should she get anything wrong. -
Under Section 153, the work only qualifies for copyright protection if it meets requirements in several different areas including the area of author. Section 154 outlines the requirements the author must meet in order for the work to receive copyright protection.
- Option one, a British citizen. Pretty sure the Indonesian monkey is not a British citizen.
- Option two, an individual domiciled or resident in the UK. Monkey lives in Indonesia.
- Option three, an individual domiciled or resident in another country to which the relevant provisions of this Part extend. This seems to include any countries to which the UK must extend national treatment with respect to copyright. Since Indonesia is a member of Berne and TRIPS, Indonesia would be one of these countries. It might seem like we need to know if the monkey is an individual, or if it can be domiciled or resident. But, that doesn’t matter because the first part of Section 154 says “if the author was at the material time a qualifying person.” (emphasis added)
So it appears under UK law, the photos are in the public domain. Under Indonesian law, the matter is less clear.
Barrels of Fun
Perhaps more fun than the real story are all the different extra facts you can add to make even more puzzlingly-fun scenarios. What if the monkey belongs to a zoo? Or a person who taught him to take pictures? What if the park or zoo where the monkey lives posts a sign that says the copyright of any photographs taken by animals inside the park or zoo belong to the park or zoo? What if it is not a monkey but one of the gorillas that can speak sign language or otherwise communicate to subjects in a photo how to move?
Personally, I like the position one of my colleagues took: Forget the copyright issue. The monkey should sue for rights of publicity.
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Kodachrome and the Great Depression
Photo by Dorothea Lange. USDA – public domain

On all the crap I learned in high school
It's a wonder
I can think at all
And though my lack of education
Hasn't hurt me none
I can read the writing on the wall
Kodachrome
You give us those nice bright colors
You give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world's a sunny day, oh yeah!
I got a Nikon camera
I love to take a photograph
So Mama, don't take my Kodachrome away
If you took all the girls I knew
When I was single
And brought them all together for one night
I know they'd never match
My sweet imagination
And everything looks worse in black and white
Kodachrome
You give us those nice bright colors
You give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world's a sunny day, oh yeah!
I got a Nikon camera
I love to take a photograph
So Mama, don't take my Kodachrome away
Mama, don't take my Kodachrome away
Mama, don't take my Kodachrome away
Mama, don't take my Kodachrome away
Mama, don't take my Kodachrome
Mama, don't take my Kodachrome
Mama, don't take my Kodachrome (away)
But, well, Mama (or someone!) DID take his Kodachrome awaaay-hey-hey-hey!
Friday, June 18, 2010
Flickr Teaming with Getty – Good for Copyright Holders?
Yesterday, Flickr announced a new program available to its users – licensing through Getty Images. Through the program, users can add a “Request to License” link next to their photos. Viewers who click this link are put in contact with Getty Images. Getty licenses the photo to the viewer on behalf of the Flickr user and transfers payment from the viewer to the Flickr user.
At first glance, this program may seem like a really good opportunity for photographers. But Flickr users interested in the Getty program need to think carefully before jumping on board.
Getty Images is a large, professional, photo clearing house that has been in business for a long, long time. Although working with Flickr is a foray into the future, Getty is still an institution based on old business models. This means a lot a lot of legal gymnastics for anyone wishing to participate, as a photographer or a licensee.
You can check out the FAQ section for more information on model license requirements, the 2-year exclusive contract required for the program and other program details.
Beneficial?
As one Getty program user and supporter comments,
“The effort is not minimal. Gathering model releases, unloading full size images, doing any post processing required, filling in photo details, having to book the shot date in about three different places, uploading model releases seperately [sic] for every photo even if you have the same release for 5 photos from one shoot.”
With all this work required to submit photos, plus the restrictions of a two-year long exclusive contract that prohibits anyone other than Getty Images from licensing your submitted photos and photos similar to your submitted photos – yes that includes even you – is there really any benefit to participating?
After all, there really isn’t a need for a third-party intermediary for licensing photos on Flickr. Every photographer can easily be contacted via Flickr Mail. Why should it be necessary to ask a third-party for permission when you can already ask the copyright holder directly? Additionally, many photographers have already granted licenses to use their photos, without the need to contact anyone.
The most apparent benefit, currently, appears to be the vetting. Photos admitted to the Getty program are thoroughly reviewed by Getty Images and approved for admission to the program. Knowing that the vetting is already done might make some photo users feel better about the search process for the right image. However, Flickr has a strong community that can also serve as a vetting process based on how many views, uses and comments a photo receives.
In the end, the program seems to be more of a way for Getty to increase the number of photographers in its pool than to really help copyright owners with licensing. But perhaps this judgment is coming too early.


















