Sadly I think you are right, but there is more.
We just had an American guy here wanting to start and invest in a company and engage photographers on regular monthly payroll, but he was turned down.
The reasons were several, it could provide a peek-hole for the US IRS, and nobody wanted the possibility to have to go to the US and be exposed to the border and other treatments as fingerprinting, email supervision, body scans or pat downs and similar activities.
The guy was genuinely happy to put money where his mouth was, but the answer was no, and only a couple of photographers had US heritage. People are scared to do business with the US, it is fear, not anything else.
On 22-Feb-2011 2:28 AM, Fred wrote:
> Especially there seems to be a backlash against USA and its laws and
> practices.
I do believe that the US is hurting itself for the long term with all of its protectionism and foolish laws that aim to protect the status quo or those in power.
Over the past several decades we have extended copyright protection beyond what was intended and allowed ridiculous patents to flood the legal system.
This will not bode well for our ability to compete in a global economy but amazingly we have remained the leader in techological innovation and even seem to have gotten better at it, perhaps because of these foolish laws. Americans may be rude, crude and brash but we are also tremendously innovative and competitive.
Fred Voetsch
Group Moderator - Selling Stock Photography
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/selling_stock_photography/
Owner - Acclaim Images, LLC
http://www.acclaimimages.com/
--- In selling_stock_photography@yahoogroups.com, RK <rolf.krohna@...> wrote:
>
> 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