Options
who "needs" to formally register copyright?
Zmom
Registered Users Posts: 45 Big grins
After reading this Digital Asset Management book by by Peter Krogh, I've been faithfully adding the circle in a c to my images' metadata, with the date and a name (though I've not published or tried to sell the images, just planning ahead!).
Also, based on a scan of the US Copyright Office page, seems work is protected upon creation. Does formal copyright registration matter mostly to professionals?
Just curious. No risk of big lost bucks yet - I just want to understand how this works.
Thanks -
Zmom
Also, based on a scan of the US Copyright Office page, seems work is protected upon creation. Does formal copyright registration matter mostly to professionals?
Just curious. No risk of big lost bucks yet - I just want to understand how this works.
Thanks -
Zmom
Zmom
0
Comments
Basically if you register your copyright you are entitled to statutory damages and lawyer's fees should your copyright be infringed. Check out this link, scroll down to part 2.
http://www.editorialphoto.com/copyright/primer.asp
Don
'I was older then, I'm younger than that now' ....
My Blog | Q+ | Moderator, Lightroom Forums | My Amateur Smugmug Stuff | My Blurb book Rust and Whimsy. More Rust , FaceBook .
But the, wouldn't it fall under Tradename?
www.intruecolors.com
Nikon D700 x2/D300
Nikon 70-200 2.8/50 1.8/85 1.8/14.24 2.8
Your business name and logo can potentially be registered as a federal trademark/service mark. That is done at the United States Patent & Trademark Office. That is a whole other set of rules. In brief you must identify your source of the goods/services, and it requires a trademark attorney at the office to search names/logos of competing goods/services.
GreyLeaf PhotoGraphy
www.intruecolors.com
Nikon D700 x2/D300
Nikon 70-200 2.8/50 1.8/85 1.8/14.24 2.8
As one that hates the intrusive watermarks that destroy otherwise good images and as a firm believer that if someone wants to steal something of yours then it will happen, I'll take the other stance that you don't have to do anything.
You own the copyright as soon as you take the picture. No need to Circle C the image. No need to register.
Do you get some unofficial extra protection..maybe...maybe not. That is why you get a good lawyer to send off a demand letter when you see something stolen and there is a chance of recoverable damages (fees).
Now, that is if it is stolen and reused in the USA. We are all (mostly) SOL if someone in Croatia uses it for a newsletter.
Most of the arguments I've read for watermarking / right-click protecting / slathering a big circle-C with your name on recent pictures follows this logic: If you don't lock your car then it is more permissible for a thief to steal your vehicle.
Huh? That makes a whopping load of sense.
Better to make your photos unattractive with small pixel sizes. Of course, those horrific watermarks that ruin the picture to the casual viewer will also keep a thief at bay. Nothing wrong with putting a C on the back printing if it makes you feel good or it is used as a marketing tool.
I have had over a hundred images 'borrowed' so far this year. They have all been used for PR-Web stuff. In every case I have asked for and received a credit. Sometimes I even get a link! Now that helps me sell stuff without having to be a bad guy to all those nice folks that just wanted a picture I took to put on their promotional web site. It even gets me a free drink now and again.:D
I just came across this on the National Geographic site:
http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/photography/photographers/ask-photographer-answers-july08.html
I'll bet, this answer was vetted by NG lawyers.
Q: I have had the incredible luck of stumbling on a very rare photo opportunity. How do I copyright a photo to sell and/or publish?
A: You don't have to copyright your photo. It's already copyrighted, and you own the copyright. You don't need to submit a form, and you don't have to use that "©" symbol or a digital watermark—those are just customary ways of identifying the copyright owner. At the moment of creation, when the artwork is "fixed" in some tangible form, copyright applies automatically. For a photographer, when you press the shutter release you are making a photo and gaining copyright to that photo at the same time. You don't have to declare copyright or file any paperwork. Copyright applies to most artistic works, such as paintings, murals, statues, TV shows, music, and for us, photography. It gives you as the photographer the exclusive right to make and sell copies of the photo....
Could you provide a legal citation for this bit of info? I find it hard to believe that this is actually true. Basically you are saying that any action against a 'taking' of property expires 3 months after the infringement. I somehow doubt the record companies would say this about bootleg recordings of a concert done by one of their artists. Now there are some bits about statutory damages and attorneys fees in the 3 month window, [http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#cr]. So there is some benefit to registering once in while.
I don't want to come down on anyone in this thread. I see a lot of bad information tossed about that has little basis is real copyright law. I'm not a lawyer yet I'd suggest if you state a 'fact' about the law, or expert opinion, that it should be cited so it can be verified by an interested reader.
And as far as Croatia goes Blaker, we are not SOL. Croatia is a signatory to the WIPO Copyright Treaty and therefore covered under DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) Title I. You can check the database at the WIPO site to see the current status of any country. Now if the infringer doesn't comply with a proper takedown notice I'm sure it wouldn't be fun to pursue them, but we are legally covered.
My Photos
My Blog
On Google+
On DrivingLine
My Photos
My Blog
On Google+
On DrivingLine
As far as Croatia goes, Off Topic, that was brought up by someone else- I never mentioned it. Please be careful of your attributions in the future.
My apologies Blaker, that's what I get for posting before I've had my coffee in the morning.
My Photos
My Blog
On Google+
On DrivingLine
In my post I did provide links so that people could do their own research on this, because ideally, you should take the info posted in these forums as a starting point, and then do your own research and make your own decisions, because only you know the specifics of your own situation and what you are comfortable with.
As for the legal citation, it was from a US goverment copyright publication.
The "protection" does not expire in 3 months. Read carefully.
You are protected if you "register" sometime in the 3 months following publication, or, if you have registered prior to the infringement.
SO, say you publish a photo on Jan 1. You do not register your photos within the 3 month window. On June 1, you notice your photo is being used without your knowledge or permission by a large car dealer in your area. Since the photo was not registered prior to this use, you are unable to sue in Federal court for damages and lawyers fees.
Say you published that same photo on Jan 1, and did not register it. On March 28 ( days before the 3 month limit is up) you notice that the car dealer is using your photo in a huge ad campaign, without your knowledge or permission . Because you are still inside that 3 month window, you can go ahead and (quickly!!) register that photo. Since your photo is now registered within the 3 month window, even though the infringement occurred BEFORE you registered, you are still protected, and can sue him in Federal court for statutory damages and lawyers fees.
If the infringement occurs on unregistered photos, you cannot sue in Federal court, you will have to pay some very hefty lawyer's fees, and you can only sue for the market value of the use of the photos. IF you win, it will be a moot victory, because after paying lawyers fees etc, you will likely be left with very little profit.
SO there is a benefit to registering your copyright.
Here is the US gov publication I was referring to- page 7. I have also excerpted the relevant part below.
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf
Copyright Registration
In general, copyright registration is a legal formality intended
to make a public record of the basic facts of a particular copyright.
However, registration is not a condition of copyright
protection. Even though registration is not a requirement for
protection, the copyright law provides several inducements
or advantages to encourage copyright owners to make registration.
Among these advantages are the following:
• Registration establishes a public record of the copyright
claim.
****• Before an infringement suit may be filed in court, registration
is necessary for works of U. S. origin.*******
• If made before or within five years of publication, registration
will establish prima facie evidence in court of
the validity of the copyright and of the facts stated in
the certificate.
• If registration is made within three months after publication
of the work or prior to an infringement of the work,
statutory damages and attorney’s fees will be available to
the copyright owner in court actions. Otherwise, only an
award of actual damages and profits is available to the
copyright owner.
• Registration allows the owner of the copyright to record
the registration with the U. S. Customs Service for protection
against the importation of infringing copies. For
additional information, go to the U. S. Customs and
Border Protection website at www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/import.
Click on “Intellectual Property Rights.”
Registration may be made at any time within the life of
the copyright. Unlike the law before 1978, when a work has
been registered in unpublished form, it is not necessary to
make another registration when the work becomes published,
although the copyright owner may register the published
edition, if desired.
Never mentioned it.
Maybe the better way to put it is that you only gain the ability to obtain additional statutory damages and laywers fees (by statue) in any suit you bring against an infringing party.
This doesn't mean you will get statutory damages or lawyer fees if you win.
but with a lto of hard work you might! 3 years of work for $20k:
http://www.cgstock.com/essays/copyright_lawsuit
Here's one that was 5 years in the making:
http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2005/06/06/daily5.html
Yeah, you did. In post #9- which I've excerpted below.
Thanks for posting the chronology of the lawsuit- that was very interesting reading!!!
Now back on topic.
If you read about photographer lawsuits keep in mind that this is just the tip of the problem. People get infringed upon all the time, people get away with it.
All the circle-c copyright protection work people spend on protecting their images is a lot of extra effort that isn't really buying them anything. Think of it as a home security system.
Annually submitting a dvd of images to the copyright folks isn't a bad idea but it may not really be worth it. Especially after reading some of the tales that actually hit the press. That guy that took 4 years and got a settlement (that he is still collecting) is about $100 a week for that effort over time.
It would be really interesting to talk to a bucnh of copyright lawyers and find out what the negotiated settlements look like for all the cases that never make it to court.
And you paraphrased wrong, thus the correction and the suggestion to "read carefully".
True, many people do get away with infringing on other people's copyrights. But that's not a good reason to make it easier for them to do it and to let them get away with it! That's like saying houses get robbed so why bother putting a lock on your door and prosecuting the thief. If your work has value, then it is worth protecting, and registering your copyright is one way of protecting your work. Sure, it won't prevent some thief from stealing your image, but it will give you the means to fight it in federal court.
( and adding the © isn't what protects your work. Your work is copyrighted the moment you create it, however , in order to sue someone for infringing on your copyright, you need to have the registration # from when you *registered* your copyright with the US copyright office).
If you are serious about protecting your images by registering them with the LOC then annually doesn't cut it- as I discussed in my initial posts here you've got to establish a workflow which includes registering your new work every 3 months ( so at the end of March you register the photos you've made during Jan Feb and March, then during June you register the photos you've made in April , May and June, etc.)
You can reread my post #14 for examples of how this protects you.
As you said, some people may not think it is worth the time or the $35 to register their copyrights and that is their decision. But the OP asked how this works, not whether it was worth it or not.
Take care : )