Interesting development. People now make more money threatening and suing others than actually on "honest work".
The backlash is that people more and more avoiding using the web at all as a source for images, or relying on free images already widely published or local photographers they personally know.
Especially there seems to be a backlash against USA and its laws and practices.
Many countries are also changing their legislation of interpretation of copyright. To take a picture on the web and use on your personal, non commercial blog, is considered the same action as cutting out a picture from a magazine and put on your bedroom wall or in your scrap book. In other words, it is allowed.
Maybe some countries are just shooting itself in the foot, or "shooting the photographers".
On 19-Feb-2011 9:22 AM, Fred wrote:
http://blog.webcopyplus.com/2011/02/14/legal-lesson-learned-copywriter-pays-4000-for-10-photo/
I recommend you go to the link above and read. There is much to think about in terms of copyright registration and how to deal with an incidence of copyright infringement.
Here is an excerpt, which, btw, is one of the ways you may use works that are copyrighted. Using an excerpt falls under the doctrine known as "fair use" - http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
*BEGIN QUOTE*
"...one of our copywriters grabbed a photo from the Web. The image: a colour 400 x 300 pixel beach shot with some greenery in the foreground. A nice shot, but nothing spectacular.
We posted it on a client's tourism blog to add zest to a promotional article — done. Sip some caffeine, get a little Twitter action, and then dive into the next copywriting project. Photo forgotten. That was in May, 2010.
The Lawyer's Letter
Fast forward a few months, we got a call from the client a couple of days before Christmas, and he wasn't feeling overly festive. He received a formal letter from a lawyer with the following introduction: "Cease and desist demand and offer to settle copyright infringement claim, and digital millennium copyright act claim, subject to Rule 408, Federal Rules of Evidence."
Apparently copyright infringement involving images that are registered with the U.S. Copyright Office allows for statutory damages of up to $30,000, or $150,000 if it can be demonstrated it was a willful act."
*END QUOTE*
Let me tell you from experience that getting a letter from a lawyer saying you need to pay four or five thousand dollars is no fun but the possibility of having to pay thirty thousand quickly makes that four thousand seem reasonable.
WE NEED TO REGISTER OUR IMAGES!
Fred Voetsch
Group Moderator - Selling Stock Photography
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/selling_stock_photography/
Owner - Acclaim Images, LLC
http://www.acclaimimages.com/
0 comments:
Post a Comment