| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
First three things you learned about Copyright Law?
Samuel Lewis, Photographer
 |
Miami | FL | USA | Posted: 9:31 AM on 07.03.09 |
->> In the course of working on a new article, I started to wonder: what are the first three things you learned about copyright law?
Please note that what you share with me may end up being quoted in the article. If you don't wish to be quoted, please do not respond. |
|
Mark Peters, Photographer
|
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 9:36 AM on 07.03.09 |
->> 1. Copyright is created when the button is pushed - not when the image is registered.
2. #1 is nice, but pretty worthless until you register it (and even then, it has to be timely to get statutory damages).
3. The VAST majority of the population doesn't have a clue about copyright laws. |
|
Michael Durisseau, Photographer, Assistant
|
Santa Fe | TX | USA | Posted: 9:51 AM on 07.03.09 |
| ->> I have to agree with Mr. Peters...and my third one would be: Don't give it away! |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 11:41 AM on 07.03.09 |
| ->> Yep, Mark summed up the first two perfectly. My third lesson would be you need a lawyer and relatively deep pockets to get much of anything out of copyright protection. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:23 PM on 07.03.09 |
->> 1. In the absence of a contractual arrangement with an employer, the creator of any song, poem, photograph, artwork, story or film is the owner of what is called intellectual property and the right of ownership is covered by US copyright statutes. The owner of the property aka works may give it away, sell it or allow others to use it for a mutually agreeable fee. If someone uses the property without permission they may be sued for unauthorized usage.
2. You can not successfully collect damages through litigation unless the work is registered, you already wealthy, or you practice IP law.
3. 99% of the population could care less about copyright laws until they have either been infringed upon or infringed upon the rights of an IP creator who seeks compensation for their usage. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:24 PM on 07.03.09 |
->> "you already wealthy,"
Should read "you are already wealthy"
Sorry for the typo, Samuel. |
|
JC Ridley, Photographer
|
Coral Springs | FL | US | Posted: 4:51 PM on 07.03.09 |
->> "The VAST majority of the population doesn't have a clue about copyright laws."
I would change that statement to "The vast majority of the population doesn't CARE about copyright laws." |
|
Manuello Paganelli, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 3:20 PM on 07.06.09 |
->> PRICELESS!!
->> 1. Copyright is created when the button is pushed - not when the image is registered.
2. #1 is nice, but pretty worthless until you register it (and even then, it has to be timely to get statutory damages).
3. The VAST majority of the population doesn't have a clue about copyright laws.
More 2 Come
www.ManuelloPaganelli.com |
|
Nick Morris, Photographer
|
San Marcos | CA | United States | Posted: 12:12 AM on 07.07.09 |
->> 1) Copyright laws do not apply to the Attorney General
2) Attorneys who protect your copyrights from the Attorney General are VERY expensive
3) See #2 |
|
Geoff Miller, Photographer
|
Portage | MI | USA | Posted: 9:44 AM on 07.07.09 |
| ->> My #3: "The lengths to which people will go to justify the theft of copyrighted material knows no bounds." |
|
Matthew Rosenberg, Photographer
|
Charlottesville | VA | United States | Posted: 1:15 PM on 07.09.09 |
->> These are recent discoveries about copyright not necessarily the first.
1) Person steals your work thinking it is wonderful and needs to have it for their use/profit.
2) Person gets bill and your work instantly becomes horrible, worthless and they didn't even make any money off it anyway.
3) Person receives lawsuit and starts spouting of need for copyright reform. |
|
Alan Look, Photographer
|
Bloomington | IL | United States | Posted: 12:49 PM on 07.10.09 |
->> Free use is not clearly enough defined.
And all the above. |
|
Bill Ross, Photographer
|
Colorado Springs | CO | USA | Posted: 10:16 AM on 07.11.09 |
->> 1. The one place where asking forgiveness instead of permission will get you in trouble.
2. Water marks only let the person who stole your photo know who they're stealing from.
3. Metallica knows everything there is to know about Copyright laws. |
|
Jeff Martin, Photographer
|
wellington | OH | usa | Posted: 1:03 PM on 07.11.09 |
->> 1 If your image isn't registered, the copyright isn't worth much.
2 many people get irate when you bring their infringement to their attention.
3 You need a good IP lawyer, because you don't know enough about law. |
|
Brian Dowling, Photographer
|
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 1:32 PM on 07.11.09 |
->> 1. Colleges will steal your work to put on their website then blame it on their students.
2. Even Olympic athletes will crop out your watermark and use your photos on their Facebook page.
3. Export small jpegs of all your images every three months with LR and burn it on a dvd to send in. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 7:16 PM on 10.25.09 |
->> Samuel,
Did you ever finish this article? It would be interesting to read. |
|
Jody Gomez, Photographer
|
Murrieta | CA | USA | Posted: 12:18 AM on 10.26.09 |
->> People like to put other people's pictures on their blog to support an article and try to call it fair use - when they're not actually discussing the picture.
When the copyright office loses part of your submission, it delays the copyrighting of your image by months during which time, your rights can be infringed and you have no recourse even if you have proof you sent everything on time!
Not enough of us copyright our images faithfully enough (myself included). |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
Samuel Lewis, Photographer
|
Miami | FL | USA | Posted: 10:44 AM on 10.26.09 |
| ->> From what I understand from my editor, the article is currently slated to run in the Jan/Feb issue of Digital Photo Pro. |
|
Samuel Lewis, Photographer
|
John Korduner, Photographer
 |
Baton Rouge | LA | United States | Posted: 9:53 AM on 06.18.10 |
->> Anyone whose simply looking for the Cliffs Notes...
Copyright: §102; in general What is protected—© protection applies to original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.
Works of authorship include the following categories: 1. Literary works; 2. Musical works, including any accompanying words; 3. Dramatic works, including any accompanying music; 4. Pantomimes/choreographics; 5. Pictorial/graphic/sculptural works; 6. Motion pics + other audiovisuals 7. Sound recordings; 8. Architectural works.
What ≠ protected; © protection ≠ extend to any idea/procedure/process/system/method of ops/concept/principle/or discovery, regardless of form in which it’s described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work. ©’s “fixed” in a tangible medium of expression when its embodiment in a copy/phonorecord, by or under the authority of the author, is sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for a period of more than transitory duration. A work consisting of sounds, images, or both, that are being transmitted, is “fixed” for purposes of this title if a fixation of the work is being made simultaneously with its transmission.
©Term Generally—Protection of a copyrighted work created after 1/1/1978 subsists from creation for life of author+70 yrs. Joint works: life of last surviving author+70 yrs Anonymous /pseudonymous works/works for hire: 95 yrs from yr of 1st pub or 120 yrs from year of creation, whichever expires first. Original: may be original even if closely resembles other works so long as similarity is fortuitous/not the result of copying. Exclus. rights: 1. repro © work in copies/phonorecs; 2. prepare deriv works 3. distro copy/phonos to pub by sale/other ownrshp transf or rental/lease/lending; 4. for liter/music/dramat/choreograph/pantomimes/movies, to perform © publicly; 5. as to 4. + pictorial/graphic/sculpture, including individual images of movies, to display © work publicly; and 6. for sound recrdngs, to perform work publicly via dig audio trans.
Moral Rights: 1. Attribute 2. Integrity 3. Inalienable after possession transfer 4. VisArtsAct: prevent destruction. Exclus rights Limits: 1st sale (exception copies) 2. Fair Use a. commer/non-comm b. publ/unpublish c. amount of portion used d. Effect of use on market.
Infringe: Π must 1. prove owner+work qual’s as © 2. Work’s ®. Direct Infr=anyone who violates, strict liable 2nd liability-Vicarious: direct infr→∆ has ability to control activities→finan benefit Contrib-direct→∆ has knowl→∆ particpat in material way or or actual infr Inducement Infr.-direct→distro of device used to affect dir infr→distro is w/ purpose of promote inf.
Remedies: 1. Actual damages a. Π’s lost profits or lost royalties b. incidental damage above losses 2. Statutory Damages a. $750-30k. b. Just amount deemed by court. c. up to 150k for willful infri. d. reduce to $200 if unaware of infringe e. No statutory damages if work’s unregist w/in timeframe. e. Atty fees for BF. |
|
Dave Breen, Photographer
|
Somerset | PA | USA | Posted: 10:12 AM on 06.18.10 |
| ->> Is the above excerpt a violation of copyright? |
|
Dave Breen, Photographer
|
Somerset | PA | USA | Posted: 10:13 AM on 06.18.10 |
| ->> Is the above excerpt a violation of copyright? Thanks for the article, Sam. |
|
John Korduner, Photographer
|
Baton Rouge | LA | United States | Posted: 10:28 AM on 06.18.10 |
| ->> No, it's an excerpt from the outline I made before my IP exam. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:03 PM on 06.18.10 |
| ->> Samuel: Nicely written article. Congrats. |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer
|
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 1:36 PM on 06.18.10 |
->> 1, 2, 3: Copyright is as good enough as your ability (knowledge, means, legal backing, etc.) to defend it.
Sad but true |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
John Korduner, Photographer
|
Baton Rouge | LA | United States | Posted: 5:03 PM on 06.18.10 |
->> For practical purposes, I think people have difficulty with copyright law because they mistakenly assume the familiar principles that apply to tangible personal property apply to intangible property by analogy.
Complication is created because people broadly use terms like "stealing" and "theft" to digital media and file sharing. Unlike torrents, It's easy to differentiate between a pawnbroker, the local Goodwill, and a fence. Consequently, when your neighbor gives you something, the average person can intuitively determine whether it's a "gift," or "stolen"
...P2P sites are really more analogous to tangible property concepts such as "hidden treasure," or "open and notorious possession." The counter intuitive nature is perpetuated by the schism between the ways intangibles and tangibles normally present themselves.
No matter how much time people invest in digging for treasure, it's extremely difficult to uncover unclaimed property. Correlatively, intangibles are like a snow storm. So much unclaimed property blows onto your steps that you're forced to shovel it simply to get out of your house in the morning. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|