# Pattern



## CLaPorte432 (Jan 3, 2012)

Tobiano, Splash. Maybe Sabino. Probably Frame.


----------



## Poseidon (Oct 1, 2010)

Tobiano and splash for sure. Probably sabino, but I don't immediately see anything that makes me think frame. If she were to be bred, I would still test her to rule it out though.

Very neat. I'm jealous of her owner.


----------



## NdAppy (Apr 8, 2009)

like I asked on your other thread, and you are avoiding, do you have the owner's permission to be posting these pictures of their horses?


----------



## Breezy2011 (Nov 23, 2012)

Yes I do have the permission. And I took these photo's so... ya. 

This mare is 16 and she is not rideable, because she has foundered. Now she is a pasture horse.


----------



## Poseidon (Oct 1, 2010)

It wouldn't matter if the photo itself was yor property, the subject of the photo is not your property. I would not be pleased if someone took pictures of my horses and posted them online without my permission. I have a ton of pictures of others' horses but I don't post them.


----------



## verona1016 (Jul 3, 2011)

Generally, the photographer owns the copyright on any photos he or she takes. If there's a person in the photo, you might need to get a release from that person for specific uses. But AFAIK there are no such regulations about other people's property (i.e. horses)

Horse Forum can make a rule against posting photos of horses that aren't yours, but that would have a large impact on how useful threads could be. Pretty much all of the photos that people post as color examples are posted by people other than the photographers or the owners of the horses.

Whether the owner has given permission to post pictures of their horses or would get upset about it is between the owner and the person who took the photos. 

Not sure why Breezy's threads are being singled out for this?


----------



## NdAppy (Apr 8, 2009)

:wink: She's not being singled out. I've asked that of others as well. It's called having respect for other people's property and not posting pictures of it without permission. Photos I link to I normally link the website they came from as well. I don't post pictures I have taken of others or their property (animals included) without their permission.


----------



## Breezy2011 (Nov 23, 2012)

Thank you! I have felt with all my threads that people are singling out every little thing I do, but when somebody else posts a thread that is a lot like mine, it is completely different.


----------



## Casey02 (Sep 20, 2011)

You do not have to have the owners permission IF YOU took the photo it doesn't matter if a person was in it or not. Hence paparazzi. Anyway she is a beautifully colored mare


----------



## CCH (Jan 23, 2011)

Casey02 said:


> You do not have to have the owners permission IF YOU took the photo it doesn't matter if a person was in it or not. Hence paparazzi. Anyway she is a beautifully colored mare


The paparazzi are allowed to do that because those celebrities appear in public places, or are visible from a place that the paparazzo has legal permission to be on (using a long lens). It really isn't the best comparison using a public figure whose marketability is usually increased by any publicity vs a piece of private property photographed on private property. It can be argued that an unflattering photo of a horse taken without permission can affect that horse's value.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## verona1016 (Jul 3, 2011)

Just because a photo may be unflattering doesn't make it illegal to use. Now, if you're using an unflattering photo specifically to slander that horse (or the breeding program, etc.) then you're running into other laws (slander or libel, depending on the situation) not because you used a photo of that horse, but in what you were using it for.

Again, if the horse's owner gets upset because a picture of her horse is on the internet in a completely neutral thread such as this one where there really isn't even enough information to identify the horse, she can let the person who posted it know she's angry or upset about it, never speak to her again, stop inviting her over for Christmas dinner, etc. but it's not illegal.



NdAppy said:


> :wink: She's not being singled out. I've asked that of others as well.


Sorry, I hadn't seen the question put up in anyone else's threads.


----------



## CCH (Jan 23, 2011)

I never used the terms "legal" or "illegal." Slander and liebel don't really matter either. The burden of proof in a civil matter is no where near what people think it is from TV. For instance, an interference with contract type case could be brought by someone who was damaged by a property value reduction based on photos being taken and used without permission. Lawyers can make all kinds of creative arguments based on what a client is willing to pay to pursue a claim.

This mare really has a unique color making her very pretty. I can understand why the OP wants to share her, but I know how extremely po'd I would be if someone used my horse for photos without permission. No it isn't criminal, but it is poor etiquette.

PS - I actually do have a law degree, so I might just know a little more than the general population. I do not usually let this information be known because I will not give any sort of opinion on legal matters.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## themacpack (Jul 16, 2009)

verona1016 said:


> Sorry, I hadn't seen the question put up in anyone else's threads.


Really, because I've seen it posed plenty of times in threads where someone is posting photos of a horse that is not their own


----------



## Muppetgirl (Sep 16, 2012)

Are we really splitting hairs over these photos guys?

It's an innocent and curious question that Breezy is asking.....she hasn't posted a picture of Prince Harry showing his moon, nor has she named the horse, owner or location.......

Breezy has shown a real interest in learning and asking questions, she has also shown a real dedication to taking care of her little filly.....As far as I have seen..

I usually agree with most of you, but this is not worth getting worked up over.


----------



## verona1016 (Jul 3, 2011)

themacpack said:


> Really, because I've seen it posed plenty of times in threads where someone is posting photos of a horse that is not their own


Really.


----------



## deserthorsewoman (Sep 13, 2011)

Have to agree with Muppet on this one.
I understand that everybody is still worked up about the recent weirdo threads, but this is not one, IMO. 
Save your strength for the weirdos to come guys;-)


----------



## Peppy Barrel Racing (Aug 16, 2011)

Agreed in the this case where no one is named I think it's a simple harmless question.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Wanstrom Horses (Dec 23, 2012)

Holy cow! The girl asked a simple question on a coat pattern. There is no need to bash her on taking a picture of another person's horse. She did clearly state that she HAD the owner's permission, now lets move on. This isnt a "lets argue about legal photo BS" forum. Sheesh! As for the horse, I wouldnt say frame or sabino. Looks most likely to be a Splash Tobiano..


----------



## Casey02 (Sep 20, 2011)

> No it isn't criminal, but it is poor etiquette.
> 
> Read more: http://www.horseforum.com/horse-colors-genetics/pattern-149404/page2/#ixzz2IGrPcP41


And that's what I was getting at the whole time.


----------

