Are Photographers dealing with copyright infringment issues?

[braxus]

Asia is notoriously bad for questionable auctions or bad deals. I bought a tape deck off Ebay over a year ago and within months I saw on the same site the exact same photos of the deck I bought on their own auction. It was in Asia. I emailed Ebay and they shut him down. This is why I will not buy goods from that area of the world. Its too risky.

[patrickjames]

Originally Posted by JBrunner

Illegal duplication of copyright material is hardly a "grey area". A photographer owns the copyright to all his/her images unless it is released by him/her. If you choose to license your images away or ignore your copyright, you may certainly do so, but that practice does not invalidate the rights of those who choose not to, nor does it validate thievery.

In reality it is. The copyright laws are definite, but the possibilty of enforcing them is definitely a grey area. You have to cross your T's and dot your I's with the copyright office. I encourage you to try to find an IP lawyer who will take your case if your images are stolen and you haven't registered them. Try to sue the average person for copyright infringement. It is absolutely not worth your time. At best you will find yourself in small claims court with a hollow victory.

I am not validating or invalidating anything here. It is important for people to understand how the copyright laws work in your favor and maybe not so much in your favor. An IP lawyer will tell you that it is better for you to sue the average person whom we are talking about here in small claims court for breach of contract or the like (you do have a contract, right?) than to try to get him for infringement. This is reality. Copyright cases will only be taken by lawyers when the sums are substantial and there is a good possibility of winning. This is reality. I know of people who have made millions this way, but it is not the general rule. You have to be savvy to succeed in this, but the average photographer, even the average working professional has no idea how it works.

Any reference to the law being absolute might as well be made in never-never land. In the real world you can be right and it will not matter. The moral is you need to protect yourself up front, not after the fact. I would encourage everyone who takes images for money or who is in danger of having images stolen to educate themselves to what is real. What you believe is pretty much what is perpetuated by people who are thinking from a moral standpoint, or from their soapbox. It sucks getting your images stolen, but it double sucks when you find out that there is really not much you can do about it since you didn't understand the true meaning and scope of the laws.

I would hope that everyone on APUG reads this post so they can begin to understand what is involved in copyright law and will begin to understand how to protect themselves.

Here is a link to an attorney's website. This is the real world for us photographers.

http://www.photoattorney.com/index.html


Regards,


Patrick

[JBrunner]

Originally Posted by patrickjames

In reality it is. The copyright laws are definite, but the possibilty of enforcing them is definitely a grey area. You have to cross your T's and dot your I's with the copyright office. I encourage you to try to find an IP lawyer who will take your case if your images are stolen and you haven't registered them. Try to sue the average person for copyright infringement. It is absolutely not worth your time. At best you will find yourself in small claims court with a hollow victory.

I am not validating or invalidating anything here. It is important for people to understand how the copyright laws work in your favor and maybe not so much in your favor. An IP lawyer will tell you that it is better for you to sue the average person whom we are talking about here in small claims court for breach of contract or the like (you do have a contract, right?) than to try to get him for infringement. This is reality. Copyright cases will only be taken by lawyers when the sums are substantial and there is a good possibility of winning. This is reality. I know of people who have made millions this way, but it is not the general rule. You have to be savvy to succeed in this, but the average photographer, even the average working professional has no idea how it works.

Any reference to the law being absolute might as well be made in never-never land. In the real world you can be right and it will not matter. The moral is you need to protect yourself up front, not after the fact. I would encourage everyone who takes images for money or who is in danger of having images stolen to educate themselves to what is real. What you believe is pretty much what is perpetuated by people who are thinking from a moral standpoint, or from their soapbox. It sucks getting your images stolen, but it double sucks when you find out that there is really not much you can do about it since you didn't understand the true meaning and scope of the laws.

I would hope that everyone on APUG reads this post so they can begin to understand what is involved in copyright law and will begin to understand how to protect themselves.

Here is a link to an attorney's website. This is the real world for us photographers.

http://www.photoattorney.com/index.html


Regards,


Patrick

I did not address litigation, which is always risky. Also, enforcement of copyright is not exclusivly tort. I have on accasion had to assert my rights. I have been successful when doing so. (infringment ceased) I have never attempted to recover money, but would welcome somebody worth suing steal an image and use it in a valuable fashion.


I shoot commercial. If it wasn't for copyright law, I would be ripped off on a regular basis. In the post I responded to it appeared to me that you were downplaying the significance of copyright law. Perhaps I interpreted it wrongly.

[patrickjames]

Originally Posted by JBrunner

I did not address litigation, which is always risky. Also, enforcement of copyright is not exclusivly tort. I have on accasion had to assert my rights. I have been successful when doing so. (infringment ceased) I have never attempted to recover money, but would welcome somebody worth suing steal an image and use it in a valuable fashion.


I shoot commercial. If it wasn't for copyright law, I would be ripped off on a regular basis. In the post I responded to it appeared to me that you were downplaying the significance of copyright law. Perhaps I interpreted it wrongly.

I wasn't downplaying the importance of copyrights if that was the impression I gave. The problem with copyright with regards to individuals is that it is difficult to enforce. This is not a matter of right or wrong, it is just a matter of economics. This is some of the grey area to which I was referring.

Regards,

Patrick