Photographer - Lawyer (photoattorney.com)

Carolyn is one of the best photo attorney's i've come across since I took up photography. Her blog/website is full of useful information, both for the novice and the expert.

Tiny, she IS a photographer, and a darned good one at that!

Cheers!

Hi Tiny, You are really wanting to make a point about "copyright Infringement" over and over again in your threads. But what are you so mad about really...

I am probably speaking out of turn here, but I think Tiny's point is very simple, to share a resource, which he believes will be extremely useful for anyone else who's interested in learning about the basics and details of copyright from one of the best sources out there.

Cheers!

Hi Sai, That's a good point, but this topic has been a source of contention in the past. It keeps coming around and around… :-)

Kelley, and i'm sure as we both know, it will continue to keep coming around and around...because, as they say, its all about the Benjamins ;)

Cheers!

Kelly,

It is an important topic and all too often we have people sharing what they "believe" to the case when it comes to "copyright infringement". Now we all have a resource, where we can find out what the LAW says about it.

We also have people who want to pretend that the "internet" does not provide a platform for "copyright protection" and I beg to differ. Once again, here is a LEGAL resource we can all search out and read through.

Carolyn may even be willing to share her insight, here in this forum and I intend to ask her about it. There are a lot of potential clients here at FAA and it would be a great benefit to everyone (including her) to have her expertise on this forum.

Thanks for the great info Tiny!

Thanks for the great info Tiny!

No problem Dave!

I am still gunning for that "most helpful member" award. :)

lol

You have my vote Tiny!

Good information to serve as a starting point concerning infringement.
Thank you

Hi Tiny, I respect your passion and agree the topic is a valid one. Yet there is so much art, music, performance, and skill in every direction being fed to our brains morning, noon, and night on the internet. Protecting our work is one thing, perfecting our craft into a viable, sellable, vehicle is something else. You have to make art people want to steal before they're even willing to buy it. Having said that, you have some really nice photography, but have you really dedicated yourself to being an artist? The truth is it's going to be tougher now than ever before, because truthfully, every single person has creativity oozing from every pore they have. It's everyone's right of passage. We each need to lend an ear to our individual paths in order to hear our personal instructions for success…Listen and you'll be led.

As always, Tiny, thanks for some great info. Until people understand fully about copyright, there will always be 'contention' in the threads. I've been on here a little over two years and it's been a topic for discussion the entire time. I learn more every time I read a thread.

Joy, while we're on the topic of copyright, I think you should consider copyrighting the phrase you used the other day :)....SOOL 'in perpetuity'. Makes me laugh every time I read one of these threads! Thanks for that!

Cheers!

Being an artist doesn't mean one has to be a victim.

This is important information for artists and the general public. When someone profits off of your hard work its good to know one's options.

Don't laugh Dave..... I am serious!!

Although I think if I won that award, there might be a mass exodus out of the forum! :)

LOL

I'm with you Tiny. You might win yet. You even had Abbie agree with you in my discussion...lol.

Protecting our work is one thing, perfecting our craft into a viable, sellable, vehicle is something else. You have to make art people want to steal before they're even willing to buy it. Having said that, you have some really nice photography, but have you really dedicated yourself to being an artist?

Kelly,

This thread has NOTHING to do with whether or not I or anyone else considers myself to be an "artist". This is not the first time you have made insinuations like this in a thread, where there was no call for it.

Are you done now?

Until you are unknown nobody care about your images.
The more popular you become more chances someone will take attempt to take from you for free...

Hi Tiny, Yes I hear you. No I'm not throwing insults at you, truly. I keep feeling something else from you that has nothing to do with your thread's topic. Just relax and create, let your work come forward without all this concern, and you'll find the perfect place for yourself.

Haha! Sai...I might just do that! lol

Kelly,

There is absolutely nothing else "behind" my thread other than helping to provide information, that may lead to better educating ourselves as not only artists but also as business people.

Let's keep to the topic.

Ready to go legal forms for Photographers and "Photographer's Legal Guide". (bottom of page)

http://www.photoattorney.com/products/

Actually a good and valuable resourse.

FWIW, I actually agree with quite a bit of what Tiny says, it is more the way he has said it in the past that can get people riled up and push the forum rule bounderies.

Check out my recent thread on an individual usage of a copyrighted image I have experienced this week. I gave it away...and it was MORE than the right thing t do.

Thanks JC. :)

Communicating via online medium is not as easy as it is in person, where people can get a better idea for tone. I am learning to tread more "lightly".

Marlene,

That is the whole point. The artist has the choice to pursue or not to pursue action. They also have the choice to "give it away" as you say.

In order to make that choice though, artists need to know what ALL the options are when it comes to their work and business.

"Two Easy Steps for Using the DMCA Takedown Notice to Battle Copyright Infringement

https://nppa.org/page/5617

Your biggest road block is getting people to read what you put out there. I opened a thread on Monday..an April Fool's Day joke..asked people to post ONE image...then said Happy April Fool's day..and go look how many posted!, and few stuck to ONE i rquested, cu....um..they don't read!!!
Ask Abbie how easy it is to get the artists to read what is CLEARLY posted on this site...lol.
There is no cure for the problem ,regardless of how much info you provide.

In the avalanche of uncategorized information and links being thrown into the forum by our host across multiple threads, he has omitted one important fact:

The question of infringement is decided by the court. Not the copyright office, not popular opinion, not the copyright holder -- the court. And it’s on a case by case basis. There are no hard and fast rules here.

Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

And it costs money (your money) to get there...

Dan,

I am linking to sites with regards to good "legal" information that all artists should at least know about. Preparing a good DMCA takedown notice can be daunting to an artist who has never had to do one. I think that is good valuable information for an artist, don't you?

Kelley, we have already discussed the "costing artist money part". There are lawyers (including the one linked to in the OP) that will take a case on contingency, once the claim has been evaluated.

"There are lawyers (including the one linked to in the OP) that will take a case on contingency,"

I'm willing to bet there are NO lawyers, including Carolyn, who would risk their own time and money to pursue a low-rez image infringement, which is, after all, what you are talking about.

Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

Dearest Tiny, If a lawyer took an art infringement case without it being "a blatant act of ROBBERY from at least a fortune 500 company" I would seriously question their motives, or expertise. And yes I heard you say, they won't bill me because they promised...

Ask Abbie how easy it is to get the artists to read what is CLEARLY posted on this site...lol.

The majority do not read what I write or what is clearly marked up on the site.

Seriously.

We can put things in that flashing pink I spoke about in another thread and they will STILL pass straight over it and ask again, or ignore it, because it does not suit them at that time

Honestly

Dan and Kelley,

That is why I made it very clear in my last post "once the claim has been evaluated". :)

--------------------------

I'm willing to bet there are NO lawyers, including Carolyn, who would risk their own time and money to pursue a low-rez image infringement, which is, after all, what you are talking about.

Dan,

I am not specifically talking about any resolution of the copyrighted image, as the image itself is copyrighted and not the resolution of the image. Nor do I find one place in this thread, where I have once mentioned anything to do with the resolution of an image.

I have provided information, for which some have been very thankful. (Even JC saw the value in it)

Thank you again for dropping by. :)

Thanks Tiny, I'm sopping up all the blood from biting my tongue (I'll try harder next time) but my real problem is where the heck did I leave my eyes?…….

Kelley, enough now please

We can put things in that flashing pink I spoke about in another thread and they will STILL pass straight over it and ask again, or ignore it, because it does not suit them at that time

Abbie,

Just because not everyone will read the information, is no reason not to post it at all. And I am not referring at all to watermarks, as that has not even been mentioned once in this thread. (at least not by me).

Some here have thanked me for posting it. JC thought it was valuable information. There is no harm in discussing it and learning more. Why some seem to want to quell that, I do not understand.

I think it IS very valuable information actually which is why I started a whole group last year or the year before JUST for copyright concerns and factual information but nobody uses it :)

"Nor do I find one place in this thread, where I have once mentioned anything to do with the resolution of an image."

Except that 100% (that's 100%) of the infringement excitement here at FAA revolves around low-rez images.

Goes to relevance. Why drag artists into a debate about something they will likely never be involved in?

Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

I just joined your Group a little while ago Abbie, but at this time I do not have any images that I would be concerned of whether or not they infringe on copyright or trademark. I have responded to discussions in your group though :)

Your group is a little different than this though Abbie. (i think - correct me if i am wrong). Your group seems to deal more with concerns "artists" have as to whether or not their work infringes on copyright or trademark in order to sell it.

Where as, what I am providing information to here is for artist to learn what their rights are when it comes to protecting their own "copyright" on the finished work, when it is either copied and/or used without permission.

I believe those are different.

Except that 100% (that's 100%) of the infringement excitement here at FAA revolves around low-rez images.

Goes to relevance. Why drag artists into a debate about something they will likely never be involved in?

Dan.

Then go discuss resolution in another thread, where it is being discussed. Image resolution or what part of an image is copyrighted, is NOT being discussed here.

THIS thread, simply has information and links to sites that provide legal information for artists to sort through and read up on.

Find one of the other threads for that course of discussion. There are plenty in the first page of the discussions right now.

If I said a made a perfect circle. I was so proud of the perfect "180" circumference I just completed. Would you feel compelled to argue with me??? (I'm just saying…)

If I said a made a perfect circle. I was so proud of the perfect "180" circumference I just completed. Would you feel compelled to argue with me??? (I'm just saying…)

Yes I would actually..... because there are 360 degrees to a perfect circle. Just saying!!

To make things clear. I started this thread. It is my thread. You are in here arguing with me, not the other way around. Right now there are those in here arguing over things that are not even being discussed in this thread. I am happy to debate them in a different thread, where those things are being discussed.

This thread provided links to "legal information" with regards to Copyright Infringement and what to do when an artist comes across a case of infringement.

Thread Summary

Many times we see complaints on the FAA forum about "Copyright Infringement" and how to go about pursuing action. Here is the link to a law firm that specializes in the law as it pertains to photographers and copyright.

Look at #5 at the page linked to below.

http://www.photoattorney.com/services/

I have just started going through this site and there is some amazing information here. A great resource!

--------------------------------

"Two Easy Steps for Using the DMCA Takedown Notice to Battle Copyright Infringement

https://nppa.org/page/5617

Yes Tiny you're right, it is your thread, and you can make your circle any size you want, which you have. I am not going to engage you any further, because I'm satisfied with who I "think" you are, and I'm moving on. Best wishes to everyone here.

Oh and everybody knows (hopefully!) a circle is 360….

Tiny, I appreciate your persistence on fleshing out this subject and thank you for posting the links to that legal info. Much appreciated. :-)

You are very welcome Arthur. I know I have learned a lot since starting to read that site last night.

It was meant to be for all copyright issues, either way

Good info for all, Tiny, and thanks for posting it.


On a side note, it amazes me how there are always those who seem to show up in threads and try and bait people into a "discussion" just for the sake of starting crap. It's uncalled for, and getting real old real quick. We used to refer to those types as "sea lawyers". Lots to say, but no credentials to go with it.

I'm through ranting now. :)

Hi,

That is why I posted links to the actual "lawyers" site - photoattorney.com

This thread was not meant to argue "opinion" of FAA members, but to point artists to places where they can find the legal answers to this debate.

"...This thread was not meant to argue "opinion" of FAA members, but to point artists to places where they can find the legal answers to this debate."



Exactly. As I previously stated, good info for all. Eventually, if you just ignore those who want to start crap, they will get the message and eventually stop.

It was meant to be for all copyright issues, either way

I will have to take a closer look at the group Abbie :)

Looks like another interesting thread. I can't wait to read it. Just marking it now.

“Like anything of value, people need to ask permission, give credit and pay fair compensation for those images,” he said. “And when they don’t, photographers need to be able to stand up for their rights.”

He added: “This ruling is important because far too often we find that photographers don’t have the power to stand up to those that infringe with impunity. I hope that this sends a message, but in reality we need a cultural change so that once again photographs are valued.” - Mickey Osterreicher-NAPA.

The photographs that were in question were originally shared via twitter, by the photographer (image owner). 1.6 million awarded for when the WEB IMAGES were used without permission. This photographer fought for four years.

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/23/haitian-photographer-wins-major-u-s-copyright-victory/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

I agree with Arthur Fix. “Tiny, I appreciate your persistence on fleshing out this subject and thank you for posting the links to that legal info. Much appreciated. :-)”

Thank you, Tiny.

I am surprised this thread seems to be slowing down so much.

bump

I like the DMCA takedown notice on this site... of course, I would need an attorney to put it in plain english for me, but that's me. That said, I copied it for future use. Otherwise, i think it has loads of valuable info.

--Donna Proctor