RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘copyright’

The US Copyright Office is ‘modernizing’ group registration of photos

27 Jan

Photographers in the USA wishing to register groups of images for copyright protection will find the process much simpler and easier starting on February 20th.

According to the US Copyright Office, ‘modernized’ practices will let people register either published or unpublished work via a new on-line application system (no more paper applications…) that will allow you to submit up to 750 images at a time. The new rules also re-define the word ‘Author’ to include individual photographers OR groups of photographers employed by the same person or organization.

The filing process will require those submitting images to title the group and each image, and to create an Excel or PDF list of each image within the group. The group of images can’t occupy more than 500MB, but compression can be used to reduce file sizes, and the registration fee for each group will be $ 55.

Unpublished and published images can’t be registered together, and all published works in an application have to have been published within the same year (but not necessarily in the same country).

A key point about the process, according to a detailed explanation by artists’ attorney Leslie Burns, is that under the scheme, each image within the group will be registered individually, so damages will be paid in full for any single image use. Infringers won’t be able to claim that using one image from a group attracts only a fraction of a claim against the registration.

The new rules go into effect February 20th, and can be read in full on the Government Publishing Office website (PDF). Or, for a more easily digestible take on what’s changing, visit the Copyright Alliance website.

Copyright Office Summary

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
U.S. Copyright Office
37 CFR Parts 201, 202
[Docket No. 2016–10]

Group Registration of Photographs

AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Copyright Office is modernizing its practices to increase the efficiency of the group registration option for photographs. This final rule modifies the procedure for registering groups of published photographs (GRPPH), and establishes a similar procedure for registering groups of unpublished photographs (GRUPH).

Applicants will be required to use a new online application specifically designed for each option, instead of using a paper application, and will be allowed to include up to 750 photographs in each claim.

The ‘‘unpublished collection’’ option (which allows an unlimited number of photographs to be registered with one application), and the ‘‘pilot program’’ (which allows an unlimited number of published photographs to be registered with the application designed for one work) will be eliminated. The corresponding ‘‘pilot program’’ for photographic databases will remain in effect for the time being.

The final rule modernizes the deposit requirements by requiring applicants to submit their photographs in a digital format when using GRPPH, GRUPH, or the pilot program for photographic databases, along with a separate document containing a list of the titles and file names for each photograph. The final rule revises the eligibility requirements for GRPPH and GRUPH by providing that all the photographs must be created by the same ‘‘author’’ (a term that includes an employer or other person for whom a work is made for hire), and clarifying that they do not need to be created by the same photographer or published within the same country. It also confirms that a group registration issued under GRPHH or GRUPH covers each photograph in the group, each photograph is registered as a separate work, and the group as a whole is not considered a compilation or a collective work.

DATES: Effective February 20, 2018.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on The US Copyright Office is ‘modernizing’ group registration of photos

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Congress is considering a copyright small claims bill you should know about

07 Oct
Photo by Dennis Skley

A bill has reached Congress that aims to establish a cheaper route for those seeking settlement of small claims in copyright infringement cases. Put forward by a bypartisan group of representatives, the Copyright Alternative in Small Claims Enforcement Act of 2017 (CASE) intends to provide a more viable alternative to federal courts for those making relatively small claims in cases where the cost of pursuing compensation deters individual photographers and small to medium sized business owners.

The current system can cost professional photographers wishing to file a claim for unauthorized use of an image almost a year’s earnings, according to a report by Copyright Defence, and copyright lawyers are unwilling to take on a case in which damages would be less than $ 30,000.

Copyright Defence says that the average claim made by photographers is $ 3,000 or less, making the pursuit of offenders impractical and letting infringers off scot-free.

The new bill proposes that a small-claims style panel be set up within the Copyright office that would allow these low-value, high-volume disputes to be heard. Such an introduction would benefit not only photographers and artists, but also musicians, film makers and anyone who produces creative work.

Bought to Congress by Hakeem Jeffries of the Democrat Party and Tom Marino, a Republican, the bill is supported by the American Society of Media Photographers, American Photographic Artists, National Press Photographers Association, Professional Photographers of America, North American Nature Photography Association, among others. The bill was first proposed by a collection of visual artists groups in February 2016.

Press release from Hakeem Jeffries:

Reps. Jeffries, Marino Lead Bipartisan Effort to Help Musicians and Artists Protect Their Creative Work

WASHINGTON, DC – A bipartisan solution to help artists, photographers, filmmakers, musicians, songwriters, authors and other creators protect their life’s work from unauthorized reproduction has been introduced today by two key members of the House Judiciary Committee — U.S. Representative Hakeem Jeffries (NY-08), a Democrat, and U.S. Representative Tom Marino (PA-10), a Republican.

The Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act of 2017 will create a Copyright Claims Board (“CCB”) in order to provide a simple, quick and less expensive forum for copyright owners to enforce their intellectual property. The majority of the copyright owners that are affected by piracy and theft are independent creators with small copyright infringement claims. The CCB will establish an alternative forum to the Federal District Court for copyright owners to protect their work from infringement.
A broad coalition of legislators have co-sponsored the bill, including Democratic Congresswoman Judy Chu (CA-33), Republican Congressman Doug Collins (GA-9), Democratic Congressman Ted Lieu (CA-33) and Republican Congressman Lamar Smith (TX-21).

Rep. Jeffries said: “The establishment of the Copyright Claims Board is critical for the creative middle class who deserve to benefit from the fruits of their labor. Copyright enforcement is essential to ensure that these artists, writers, musicians and other creators are able to commercialize their creative work in order to earn a livelihood. The CASE Act will enable creators to enforce copyright protected content in a fair, timely and affordable manner. This legislation is a strong step in the right direction.”

Representative Marino said: “Creators, solo entrepreneurs, photographers, and artists often struggle to enforce their copyright in a timely and cost efficient manner. This can hinder creativity and prevent these professionals from being able to sustain a profitable livelihood. The CASE Act provides a boost to copyright holders and allows a forum for timely resolutions. This is a positive step in the right direction.”

Representative Collins said: “America’s economic leadership depends on its commitment to protecting intellectual property, and I’m proud to work with my friend Congressman Hakeem Jeffries to provide another tool to make this possible. A copyright small claims system would offer small creators a simple, effective forum for defending their property rights against infringement. We’re working to modernize the Copyright Office to meet the needs of today and tomorrow—including music licensing structures—and this bill is a critical step in strengthening intellectual property protections for creators who find themselves disadvantaged by existing policies.”

Representative Lieu said: “More than 2 million hardworking artists in the United States rely on the U.S. Copyright Office to protect their livelihoods. For too long, our legal system skewed in favor of low-volume, high-value industries. But for many independent artists, whose claims of infringement often total a few thousand dollars, it is far too expensive to sue in federal court – essentially forcing creators to forfeit their rights. The Small Claims Board is an important step toward ensuring that digital photographers, graphic artists, illustrators, and others have a way to resolve disputes quickly and affordably. I commend my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for supporting this crucial effort.”

Representative Smith said: “Our founders enshrined copyright protection for creators’ works in the Constitution. The Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act offers creators an efficient and cost-effective process to protect their creations. I look forward to working with the authors of the bill to protect the intellectual property of all innovators.”

Representative Chu said: “Creators like artists, photographers, and songwriters contribute over a trillion dollars to our economy each year. But intellectual property theft makes it difficult for creators to earn a living. This is especially true for small and individual creators who depend on licensing and copyright, but lack the resources to adequately challenge copyright infringement claims in federal court. I’m proud to support the CASE Act because it proposes a common sense solution that will make it easier for creators to protect their intellectual property and continue to share their works and grow our economy.”

Participation in the CCB will be voluntary, and respondents will have the ability to opt out. The CCB will be housed within the U.S. Copyright Office, and its jurisdiction limited to civil copyright cases with a cap of $ 30,000 in damages. A panel of three Copyright Claims Officers will be designated to adjudicate and settle copyright claims. The simplified proceedings do not require the parties to appear in-person and will permit them to proceed pro se – i.e., without an attorney.

The bill is supported by the Authors Guild, American Society of Media Photographers, American Photographic Artists, National Press Photographers Association, Professional Photographers of America, North American Nature Photography Association, Songwriters Guild of America, Nashville Songwriters Association International, National Music Publishers Association, Digital Media Licensing Association, Graphic Artists Guild, Creative Future, and the Copyright Alliance.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Congress is considering a copyright small claims bill you should know about

Posted in Uncategorized

 

ImageRights expands copyright registration, adds new blockchain protections

19 Sep

Photo protection company ImageRights International, a Boston-based business with offices in Seattle and Berlin, has launched a new image copyright registration system that anyone can use, not just subscribers. The company offers both a Lightroom plugin and a website-based registration tool that streamlines registrations, including automatically checking for errors and filling in forms.

ImageRights’ new copyright registration option costs $ 100 on top of the US Copyright Office fee ($ 35 or higher). This is compared to ImageRights’ subscriber plans, which charge $ 69 for registering a single image and $ 89 for registering multiple images. On top of that, the company offers subscribers additional services such as assessing infringement claims, finding unauthorized uses of a registered photo, and more. But now you don’t need to subscribe to take advantage of their streamlined registration system.

In addition, ImageRights is taking a cue from Binded (formerly Blokai) by launching a Bitcoin blockchain record that uses the technology to save the ImageRights Deposit Copy Certificate of Warranty document it creates when someone uses its service to register a photo. Talking to PDN about this, ImageRights CEO Joe Naylor explained:

We make a hash of this [warranty] document and inscribe it into the Bitcoin Blockchain. This is a tool that helps us during an infringement settlement discussion when the other party questions whether or not an image was really covered by the USCO registration certificate that we say it is. We can show them the warranty where they can now see a visual representation of the image (the thumbnail) associated with the USCO Registration number. And to help prove that we didn’t just fabricate the document when they challenged us, we can show that from the blockchain inscription records that this document existed at that date.

ImageRights is one of multiple services that helps photographers register their image copyrights, though it says it is the only one with a fully automated registration system. Binded is a popular alternative, and it recently announced free one-click registrations.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on ImageRights expands copyright registration, adds new blockchain protections

Posted in Uncategorized

 

PETA and David Slater settle copyright lawsuit over monkey selfie

14 Sep
Photo: David Slater

PETA has announced that it has settled its copyright lawsuit against photographer David Slater over his iconic “monkey selfie,” a self-portrait allegedly taken by a macaque named Naruto. The image went viral a few years ago, ultimately catching the attention of PETA, who argued that Naruto—not Slater—was the image’s legal copyright holder. This spurred a lawsuit that has dragged on for about two years.

The legal issues began shortly after the monkey selfie went viral. Various sites used the image without Slater’s permission and refused to cease use on the claim that Slater didn’t own the copyright. The U.S. Copyright Office didn’t prove helpful in the matter, having issued an official guidance stating that copyright could only be granted to a work that was created by a human.

PETA swooped in soon after, hitting Slater with a lawsuit in 2015 on behalf of Naruto, the macaque it claimed captured the photo (there’s some debate on this topic). The resulting legal spat drained Slater financially, but things began looking up this past summer when courts questioned whether PETA even had the legal standing to bring a lawsuit on Naruto’s behalf, among other things. As anticipated, the courts’ push against the lawsuit has seemingly spurred a settlement.

According to an announcement posted to PETA’s blog on Tuesday, Slater has agreed to settlement terms that require him to donate 25% of future revenue from the image to charities that protect macaques like Naruto. PETA still maintains that Naruto and other macaques like him are, “worthy of having legal ownership of their own intellectual property and holding other rights as members of the legal community.”

The settlement was not a victory for the photography community, however. NPR reports that both Slater’s legal team and PETA have jointly requested that the 9th Circuit Court throw out a ruling made by a lower court that found animals incapable of owning copyrights.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on PETA and David Slater settle copyright lawsuit over monkey selfie

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Zillow and VHT appeal $4 million copyright infringement ruling

21 Jul

Real estate listing firm Zillow Group and photography firm VHT have been locked in a huge copyright lawsuit over Zillow’s alleged infringement of thousands of VHT’s real estate images for years now, and it doesn’t look like it’s going to end any time soon.

VHT originally filed the suit against Zillow Group in 2015, alleging that tens of thousands of its images were used without permission on both the Zillow.com website and Zillow Digs. Though the claims regarding Zillow.com were dismissed last year, the legal matter has persisted over alleged infringement on Zillow Digs.

This past February, VHT was awarded $ 8.24 million in statutory damages and $ 79,875 in actual damages by a jury over copyrighted images that appeared without authorization on Zillow Digs. The matter took another turn last month, however, when a judge slashed that figure in half, citing lack of evidence to prove that most of the 28,000+ images were ever viewed by users.

Following that, both VHT and Zillow Group petitioned the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this week in an effort to have the lower court’s ruling overturned. The case remains ongoing.

This isn’t the first legal row Zillow has been involved in over image copyright issues. The company was recently in the news over legal threats it issued against blogger Kate Wagner of ‘McMansion Hell’ over her use of photos reportedly sourced in part from Zillow’s website. It was soon revealed that Zillow did not own the copyrights to those images, but was instead attempting to enforce third-party contracts to which Wagner was not a party. The company publicly stated that it would not pursue legal actions against Wagner over what her attorneys called fair use of the images.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Zillow and VHT appeal $4 million copyright infringement ruling

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Photographer sues Procter & Gamble for $75M over copyright violations

19 Jul

Mega-company Procter & Gamble is being sued by Cincinnati-based photographer Annette Navarro, who alleges that P&G used some of her photographs beyond the time frame and region for which she was paid.

The company allegedly paid to use Navarro’s photos cited in the lawsuit for the duration of three years and only within North America, but continued to use them after the three years had expired, and put them on international products as well. If found guilty of copyright violations, Procter & Gamble could be on the hook for more than $ 75 million in damages.

According to the lawsuit, Procter & Gamble licensed some of Navarro’s photos for the North American market alone, something allegedly done as a way to reduce costs. However, complaints from modeling agencies alerted Navarro to the images’ use beyond the region for which they were licensed. Though P&G has since paid those modeling agencies, Navarro rejected the company’s proposed payment due to uncertainty about the extent of P&Gs alleged violations.

The complaint, which was filed with the U.S. District Court for Southern Ohio on June 14, also cites Saatchi & Saatchi X and LPK as defendants. Procter & Gamble hasn’t yet issued a statement on the lawsuit.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Photographer sues Procter & Gamble for $75M over copyright violations

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Photographer behind famous ‘monkey selfie’ is broke after years-long copyright battle

14 Jul
The infamous photo, captured when the monkey pressed the shutter, has become the subject of a years-long copyright dispute that has left Slater broke. Photo: David Slater

Freelance photographer David Slater, once one of the most talked-about photographers in the world because of his serendipitous ‘monkey selfies,’ is now considering dog walking… or giving tennis lessons. According to The Guardian, the selfsame selfie that made Slater famous has left him broke after years of legal disputes between Slater and both Wikimedia and PETA.

In case you’ve not been following this strangest of copyright battles, the details are as follows. In 2011, Slater traveled to Sulawesi, Indonesia where, by his account, he managed to coax some macaques to start playing with his camera gear. Slater did this on purpose, he says, because he was having trouble getting a close up wide-angle shot of the monkeys with their eyes open.

His gambit worked. One of the macaques took a few ‘selfies’ that immediately went viral, earning Slater a few thousand pounds… then the legal troubles started.

Wikimedia refused to take down the photo at Slater’s request, claiming that he wasn’t the copyright holder since he didn’t press the shutter. Then the US Copyright Office ruled that animals cannot own copyrights, leaving the photo ostensibly author-less. And finally, since Slater continues to claim copyright, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) sued him on behalf of the macaque in 2015.

That pretty much brings us to yesterday’s article in The Guardian, in which Slater admits that years of legal battles have left him broke and ready to ‘pack it all in.’ He couldn’t even afford the airfare to attend his own trial in San Francisco this week—instead, he watched a livestream of the trial from his home in the UK.

Slater’s current predicament isn’t just a cautionary tale for photographers who dream of going viral, it offers fascinating insights into the archaic laws surrounding authorship and copyright. Of course, the idea that this case might prevent future photographers from going through something similar is probably small consolation for Slater at this junction.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Photographer behind famous ‘monkey selfie’ is broke after years-long copyright battle

Posted in Uncategorized

 

New startup ‘Binded’ aims to simplify copyright for photographers

28 May

How do you stop your images from being stolen? And if it happens, what can you do about it? Copyright disputes are among the most difficult issues that face working photographers, and in the US, registering copyright is time-consuming and expensive in itself.

Binded CEO Nathan Lands is pitching the service as an easier alternative to traditional means of registering copyright.

He has pledged that Binded will remain a free service, but one that creates a permanent record of copyright, which can be used in the event of a dispute.

‘Binded’ is a free service that aims to simplify the process of registering – and enforcing – copyright for photographers. When you upload an image to Binded, it creates a digital ‘fingerprint’ which serves as a permanent record that you own the copyright. This record is then written to the bitcoin blockchain. Binded will then monitor use of the image on the Internet, and automatically notify the copyright holder if it detects unauthorized use. 

For now, uploading an image to Binded does not count as an official government registration of copyright in the US. According to CEO Nathan Lands, that’s something that he hopes will be added to the service over time.

Previously known as Blockai, the startup has just raised an additional $ 950,000 in funding from investors, bringing total funding to $ 1.5 million.

What do you think? Let us know in the comments.

Learn more at binded.com

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on New startup ‘Binded’ aims to simplify copyright for photographers

Posted in Uncategorized

 

ImageRights – Finding and Pursuing Copyright Infringement of Your Images

11 Sep

PWC-Image-Rights-11Image Rights (imagerights.com) is a middleman for those of us not in tune with the various legal systems, as they pertain to unauthorized use of our images. It’s an opportunity to go after copyright infringement (entities who use your photo work without your permission) and effectively hire a lawyer in a number of countries. It’s also a discovery service to find out where you images are being used.

It’s not perfect, and does not pertain to every case of copyright infringement, but it is a useful tool for those with a lot of online images. This article is an overview of the service, as an in-depth how-to would be very lengthy.

How it Works

Getting Started

Let’s take a look at the dashboard of Image Rights.

PWC-Image-Rights-01

I like that Image Rights (IR) uses a simple flow diagram to help me visualize what goes where, and what comes next. Images are uploaded by you (upper left), then when a discovery happens (upper middle) there are some options. Starting with the Inbox, you are shown all the current matches for your images. It is then up to you to filter the noise form the signal.

PWC-Image-Rights-02-Edit

I have redacted the names to protect the (potentially) innocent or guilty, except for National Geographic. I left them up there so you can see the details. That was a photo I entered in their contest, so I know that is an authorized use of my image.

IR gives you a link to where the image is stored (it will also show you items that are hot-linked) and where it is used. At this point, you click through the links to see if the image is actually used on the site (sometimes it no longer exists) and if it really is yours.

Opening a Case

Clicking the check box next to an image means you want to open a case to start an investigation. Doing so brings up the Prepare Case screen (see below).

PWC-Image-Rights-03

Here is your chance to triple check the image use, let IR know if the image is registered with the US Copyright Office (USCO), and give them details of your normal fees.

Down at the bottom is where you finish your submission and provide more details. I often have images show up from articles posted here on dPS, that are scrapped by a number of disrespectful sites. I will mention the total number of images and their use. Real people read these comments, and they help clarify all the details to prevent too much back and forth during the discovery phase.

PWC-Image-Rights-04-Edit

Once you click Submit, then poof! Away it goes to be reviewed.

Sorting the Wheat from the Chaff

Getting back to the Inbox for a moment, there are more options than just opening a case. Take a look at the drop down offered next to each item.

PWC-Image-Rights-05

The Sightings Folders explains each of these.

PWC-Image-Rights-06

Those are my real world numbers after using the service for 18 months, along with explanations that most of these things will not be followed up by IR. I use the Authorized and My Site options often, as IR will find my images here on dPS, as well as other sites where I write. This is why they have the “Power User” section at the bottom of that screen; to help you create Quick Move buttons if you find you are clicking the same things over and over again.

Where it Goes Next

Back to the dashboard:

PWC-Image-Rights-01

After submission, your claim will be assessed by real people at IR, then it will be taken on one of three paths.

  1. Case Closed: Various reasons can close a case. Often this is because the claim is outside of countries where IR has legal relationships.
  2. Takedown: The case may have merit, but recovery prospects look low, or no firm will take on the case. These items are moved to “Recommended for Takedown”. These are up to you to complete and sometimes recovery of a fee is still possible on your own.
  3. Recommended for Recovery: this is where you hope your case will end up. You will receive an email asking you what you want to do. Here, the law firm has given input to IR about how much should be asked from the infringer and you are given options to pursue or not.

If you agree to the terms, the case will move to the active stage, and the law firm will being their lawyering activities to attempt to recover a fee from the infringer. I have seen cases sit open for 6-12 months. My oldest is now 16 months. Sometimes it takes a while.

Winning, or Not

In an over-simplified view of the site, cases that are open will either be won or lost. Sometimes they are closed because of no action.

If you win, yay! IR will send you an email, and a note will be added to your case describing how much was recovered and what your cut will be. Payments can take a month or two to filter through.

What Does it Cost?

ImageRights has three basic levels of service.

PWC-Image-Rights-07

The basic level allows you to upload 1000 images, costs $ 50 each time you open a case, and allows you to keep 50% of any money recovered from infringers.

The Pro level allows you to upload 50,000 images, costs $ 495/year and gives a 55% payout. It also comes with three free USCO registrations (more on that in a minute).

The Premier level allows you to upload 125,000 images, costs $ 1295/year, pays out 60%, and comes with five USCO registrations.

How Photographers can Use ImageRights

The most obvious use of IR is to find out who is using your images, and if you choose, make them stop and/or pay for the use of your image.

As their Basic service is free and includes up to 1000 images, it’s a good way to kick the tires and see if the service is useful to you. Be prepared for a bit of noise at first as the crawlers are given your fresh files. Also, if you have some common photos of icons (e.g. The Taj Mahal) be prepared for some false positives.

In the past year I have recovered more money using IR that I have sold via Alamy, my stock photography host. That stat is also common among the my friends who use the service, and also sell stock photos.

I have also found it is a good way to build your CV and electronic tear sheets. One of my clients uses my images in their advertising and is allowed to distribute them to re-sellers of their service for advertising. I can see where the images are used and potentially find new clients who are in need of similar images.

Copyright Registration

IR also has a useful USA copyright registration feature. You can register up to 750 images at a time in one process.

PWC-Image-Rights-08-Edit

You can do this in the Images area, by selecting individual images you wish to register, then clicking “Register” at the top. Or you can start a registration from the USCO Registration tab, which will eventually loop you around to selecting individual items.

PWC-Image-Rights-09

The fee is $ 89 ($ 55 of which is the USCO fee) for Basic members and the other tiers each get a number of registrations free. You will receive a certificate in the mail, and an email with all the file names listed. IR will also remember which items are in process, or have finished registration, when it comes to opening cases. They will even put this data into the metadata of your image file if you use Lightroom!

Lightroom Publishing Service

Lastly, IR has a Lightroom Publishing Service which is a godsend for those of us addicted to the Adobe world of image edits. Create folders in the service just like you would in any other service and then publish them to the site.

PWC-Image-Rights-10

IR then scours the Internet looking for new matches. Plus, if you register any images with the US Copyright Office, that information will be shown in the image metadata inside Lightroom.

Limits of the system

First, there are the countries where IR has no partner legal firm. China, Colombia, Mali; these are some of the many countries without well-defined, and fair copyright protection systems.

Second, there are many uses which just aren’t worth a lawyer’s time to pursue. Blogs, image share sites, and social media platforms are a few of the instances where the payout, or lack of a chance of payout, means no firm will take your case. You are still free to pursue action yourself though.

Also, the bots that run the checks don’t catch everything. Other services like TinEye and Google Image Search are useful in finding other cases of infringement. IR does have a feature called ClaimCapture that let’s you manually enter an infringement in order to purse, so using other search sites is helpful.

People can also simply fail to respond and often there is little you can do. I had a law firm, of all people, blatantly (website banner) use one of my images without permission. They were contacted by IR’s law firm and I noticed the image was promptly removed, but they simply ignored future requests for payment. Knowing that the cost of taking another firm to court would outweigh the benefit, this case was closed after a year of non-response.

Most-stolen-image-rights

This is my most found image, it’s been taken and used on 15 sites without my permission.

How much time does it take

There is a learning curve at first, for sure. I spent maybe an hour a day at first, or after I uploaded a major amount of images. But like anything, I started seeing what was actionable and what was just not worth it. Now it is about 10 minutes a day, as things are more calm. At first it is a lot of work until you start seeing the types of sites taking your images. I notice Russian or Chinese or Nepali sites and I know I have no chance of recovery, so I put them in the “no chance for recovery” type piles instead of taking the time to submit them, only to have IR reject them. That part is just learned from doing. But it was certainly worth it for me as for pay out.

Conclusion

It’s not a perfect system. If you opt for the Pro plan there is risk of not seeing a return. So far it has worked okay for me, but it’s not like I will retire on all the illegal use of my photos. I like that it gives me some recourse when there is an obvious infringement (like Yahoo using my photo and removing my copyright). It also highlights sites where a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notice is needed. Lastly, it is a relatively easy way to register your images with the US Copyright Office.

Do you do anything to protect your stock photography? What services or methods do you use? If you do photography as a hobby, it may not be worthwhile for you to go to all this trouble. But if you make a living from your images you may want to look into ImageRights.

googletag.cmd.push(function() {
tablet_slots.push( googletag.defineSlot( “/1005424/_dPSv4_tab-all-article-bottom_(300×250)”, [300, 250], “pb-ad-78623” ).addService( googletag.pubads() ) ); } );

googletag.cmd.push(function() {
mobile_slots.push( googletag.defineSlot( “/1005424/_dPSv4_mob-all-article-bottom_(300×250)”, [300, 250], “pb-ad-78158” ).addService( googletag.pubads() ) ); } );

The post ImageRights – Finding and Pursuing Copyright Infringement of Your Images by Peter West Carey appeared first on Digital Photography School.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on ImageRights – Finding and Pursuing Copyright Infringement of Your Images

Posted in Photography

 

Getty Images sued for $1 billion over alleged copyright infringement

29 Jul
Photographer Carol Highsmith with her Phase One camera. Photo via The Lyda Hill Texas Collection of Photographs in Carol M. Highsmith’s America Project, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division.

Photographer Carol M. Highsmith is suing Getty Images for $ 1 billion over its alleged copyright infringement of 18,755 of her photos. The lawsuit, which was filed in a New York federal court on July 25, alleges that Getty Images has been charging fees to license her images without her permission – the same images she has provided to the Library of Congress for free use by the public. In addition to distributing her images, the lawsuit alleges that Getty did not give Highsmith proper credit for her photos.

The legal claim alleges statutory damages at up to $ 468,875,000. But because of a ruling against Getty in Morel v. Getty, a previous copyright case, the damages can reportedly be tripled to deter ‘bad faith business practices’. Highsmith became aware of Getty’s alleged copyright infringement after, she says, it sent her a letter accusing her of infringing the copyright of her own photograph by posting it on her own non-profit organization’s website.

The claim states, in part, ‘The defendants have apparently misappropriated Ms. Highsmith’s generous gift to the American people. [Getty Images and subsidiaries] are not only unlawfully charging licensing fees… but are falsely and fraudulently holding themselves out as the exclusive copyright owner.” The lawsuit also claims Highsmith’s reputation has suffered a serious blow as a result of Getty’s alleged actions. 

Via: PDNPulse, Hyperallergic

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Getty Images sued for $1 billion over alleged copyright infringement

Posted in Uncategorized