Copywright

Take screenshots, save the emails and contact an attorney!

Mark Twain — 'Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured.'

In this case, they were not making money on it, they weren't taking money away from you....I'd let it go

if it were me in this case i would let it go as well. i too have seen this idea before and they have said they won't use it again. they aren't selling it, its not worth the stress and hassle. if they were selling it, it would be a different matter. they should not have used it without permission, but, over and done.

I would not let it go. It IS copyright to you. The idea may not be but that image is. Sorry but totally disagree with letting people get away with it, especially ones that say they have copyright lawyers

Someone may give you a link soon to a site that will do this for you

Thank you Abbie! I totally agree. Theft is theft. While pursuing legal action against my latest image theft, as usual, my soft heart almost got the best of me. I have let them slide for many years. I then thought about the two times that my home was broken into and many precious things stolen that could never be replaced, would I have let them go and begged them to return my grandmothers jewelry? NOPE! I would have pulled their toe nails out with a smile on my face.
My painting with my signature cut off is marketed all over the place by this person and that is a great injustice to me. I say go for it!!!

"they referred me to their lawyer on copyright laws."

Jane, before you launch a potentially libelous campaign you would be well advised to first contact a lawyer -- a real one.


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

What's that snowman movie - let it go, let it go!

Does make a nice case for watermarks. Some people believe its free for the using if they don't see one.

You're assuming, Edward, that he actually doesn't know that it is copyrighted regardless of whether it has a watermark. My cynical side tells me there's a chance he's lying. I'd pursue it. Chances are the lawyer knows the company is against a wall. They could be bluffing you and hoping you do it let it go. Besides, what small pub has a team of lawyers at their beck and call?

By the way, I would never tell anyone you would have given it to them had they asked. It's sets a bad precedent plus if tis goes to court -- which it likely won't -- that could come back and bite yu. Besides, you should (almost) never give your work away for free.

Why stop at ordinary watermarks? Many people have a lengthy copyright rant included with their profile. If they don't want their images shared that rant should be printed over the top of every image they have.


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

Since he agreed not use the image anymore I would simply reply with a thank you, and a polite comment for him to check on his copyright knowledge. Your own the copyright of the image the minute you created it. You do not need a watermark to own the copyright. Lots of legal references on this.

Registration of copyrights is much more powerful and give you "teeth" in the event you need to dig your heels in. And most lawyers will not take a copyright case if the image is not registered.

In other words, you'll have a bigger headache if you choose to pursue this and it may end up costing you something, be it money or aggravation.

The guy will move on to the next free image he can grab off the Internet and stick it on his website. There is no payoff ahead. But at least maybe he'll think twice next time.

" But at least maybe he'll think twice next time."

When people bite into their apple they don't expect to find a razor blade. That analogy works for the billions and billions of images on the web which can be freely used with no disturbing consequences.

Before getting upset beyond all reason that your image has been used without your permission, please take a moment to understand how that could have happened. Which images on the net contain the razor blade? Can you tell?

The current system not only makes infringement easy easy easy, but highly probable and consequence free.



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

Dan, I think the razor blade would be in the images that a photographer or artist sells........

I have over 100 infringements a month! I only go after the ones that are a real legal cases. I'd let this one go. But it's not my work being infringed. I DID talk to a REAL Copyright Lawyer before I started pursing infringements. It is a GREAT idea! and quite eye opening.

Yes, Phyllis, some artists think that's obvious. But the vast majority of people with access to copy-paste-share have no idea. This has been demonstrated over and over for years -- years!! And still artists are bowled over when it happens. Why is that? Why are artists so slow to catch on?


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

Ok, we do not need yet another discourse on what people 'think'. In this case we are only interested in the infringement that's taken place

Whether Jane chooses to go further or not is up to her but the image HAS been infringed. Ignorance of the law is no defence

why not ask for an attribution and a link back to your image page - it may drive a few sales... ;-)

Perhaps major companies that deal with printing and selling images need to begin a PSA campaign to educate the public. Get together a trade group to fund it etc

Thanks so much for your input. You all have given me a lot to think about. I plan on laying low, sending a few vague emails about how my lawyer will be in touch with theirs and let them squirm and stew a little bit. But ultimately, I plan on letting it go. Incidentally, music bands, restaurants, magazines, plays etc have asked my permission to use my images. I usually say it's ok (if it's a small band, just starting out or a new magazine, etc). I like to help out the "little guy" just starting out. If it was a larger brewery, liker Busch (InBev), Coors, etc......there us NO WAY I would let them use my image for free. No. Way.

Personally, I wouldn't say anything about lawyers unless you really plan to contact one.

And maybe you can contact one and be given a little advice as to how to proceed, if you should proceed at all. Informed decisions are usually the best decisions.

Joshua - here are three trade groups for you -

https://www.clickbooq.com/blog/3-professional-photographer-organizations-you-should-consider-joining

My stock agency will go after inappropriate usage if I report it and they protect their collection with strong watermarks.

But don't expect a POD to do your policing for you. Especially if you don't have an exclusive relationship with them.

...

I had a small band ask about an image for an EP. It was an image in my stock agency portfolio. I sent them over there and they licensed it. Once you start giving away images to anyone who asks, its kind of hard to get upset when someone takes one.

Images have value and should be treated that way. If someone wants it, it has value.

This case may not be as straightforward as it seems. Even if you took the photo of the chocolate rabbits (which I'm not doubting for one minute), the joke itself is as old as the hills and may well be copyrighted, but not to you.

Write this one off to experience, because if you pursue it, you might end up biting off more than you can chew, so to speak.

Abbie, I am currious why you always want to stifle/stop people hearing the opinions of others? I personally look to hear what other people think. I am not trying to be antogonistic, Its just something I see over and over on these messages. I actually come to here to these messages to get others opinions and I most like opinions that are opposite of mine as it either solidifies my position or can get me to see the error of my ways. How else can you grow as an individual?

Here's the thing about Dan's razor in the apple fable.

When people buy an apple from a federally inspected, state inspected, licensed, authorized fruit seller - i.e. your local grocery store. You don't expect to get listeria or a razor blade.

Yet when you to up to a strangers house on Oct. 31st in a costume and ask for free food, most people inspect the items before ingesting.

Jane, I had a similar issue in January when I found a large UK hotel had used one of my images in their Christmas website promotional work.

I then received email from their "marketing manager" who said the same as your pub man - it was not watermarked therefor we can use it.

I pointed out to him that any marketing manager who knew his job properly should know that copyright exists by default, and lack of a watermark does not mean it is freely available.

He then backed down and said they would remove my picture immediately. I pointed out that as it was January and they had already had the use of my picture in the build up to Christmas that we could resolve the issue amicably if he paid my normal fee for website use, which he agreed to do, and sure enough he paid up.

Might be worth giving that a shot.

a Watermark is not necessarily a sign of copyright whereas a signature and perhaps the © might be more indicative.

Jane,

I would ignore every excuse the imbibing CEO of a brewery makes. It is all nonsense after the fact.

It was infringed upon, but you could also see it as a bit of an honor in the future and just ask for credit somewhere on his site.

Such as "Happy Easter from all of us at..........., photo by Jane....."
Because this is his commercial website I would not expect an embedded link.
Turn lemons into lemonade.

Dave

Good idea, David Birchall and good outcome

LOL - Imbibing CEO

His arrogant email would be enough to tick me off and make me want to cause him grief. But retribution is a gut response so I'd advise you to think it through and decide whether pursuing punishment would be the best outcome for YOU. This should be about what's best for you, not worst for him though that's certainly not mutually exclusive.

Very true Ms. Bishop! If I might add, the second worst thing would be for you to do nothing!

I wouldn't mention on here or in public that you let images be used for free (no matter who or what they are) If one day, you do go down the route of using an attorney and it goes to court, the the opposing council could use this information against you.

It doesn't matter if your work is watermarked or not, copyright is yours once you click that button on your camera. No company or person should assume if its on the internet, it is then free.

"No company or person should assume if its on the internet, it is then free."

Google is handling about 2 million takedown requests per DAY. That's just Google, and that's up from a few dozen requests per year in 2008.

People are not getting (or completely ignoring) the "you can't use this without permission" message. At 2 million requests a day, is the system actually working?


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

From googles perspective it is working like a charm. Allow people to steal and abuse others property but have a system that will purport to help protect those abused rights while all along earning revenue from the stolen property.

I have had a very similar situation in which a greeting was placed over where my large watermark/signature had been . The card was used for several years. Public slandering can backfire so I didn't do that. It was a non profit group. Eventually they agreed to take the image off their web site and no longer use it in print. It was a long fight that I won by bringing my complaint to his associates. who got him to send me a letter reassuring me that he was not going to use the image anymore. You have that. I don't see what more you can expect to get.

No doubt designers would love for all images to be free for the taking without all the hassle of having to pay for a license or track down the annoying copyright holders and wasting time and effort asking for permission.

Did you register the image with the U.S. Copyright Office? (Please DO NOT answer that question here. Everything you post on the internet can be used as evidence in a a lawsuit.)

(a) If you did not register, you will have a very difficult time enforcing your copyright. If it were me, and I had not registered my work, I would drop the issue. Or you could contact them, and tell them you didn't want to start a legal fight, you just hoped they appreciated your work as an artist enough to send you a case of beer, and sending a case of beer would go a long way toward making you ok with them using your image every year if they want to.

(b) If you did register, you will need to decide whether it's worth the time, money & aggravation to pursue this. I don't know for sure, but if *I* were their attorney and/or a member of their public relations dept, I would be all for sending you a case of beer in exchange for you granting them the right to use the image on their website. That would have gotten them out of the "possible infringement" jam very cheaply (way cheaper than hiring a lawyer to scare you away) and been a win-win for everyone. But they didn't (so I'm wondering if they really did get an attorney involved or if that was just a scare tactic.)

(c) Copyrightable: There are some images that are not copyrightable because they're in the public domain. A pair of rabbits, by itself, might not be copyrightable. But... there's enough creativity in the addition of the words and etc., that I'm betting on this image being copyrightable. The bar for the amount of creativity you have to add to make an image copyrightable is pretty low.

(d) "It wasn't watermarked" is irrelevant to whether or not an image is copyrighted. If they had talked to a lawyer, the lawyer probably would have told them that.

(See the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) links on www.copyright.gov for more info on registration if you aren't familiar with the registration process. Also see www.copyright,gov) to find out more about copyrightability and penalties/damages for infringement / unauthorized use.

Now go talk to a lawyer, and see if s/he wants to split a free case of beer with you. Or maybe the lawyer would rather split the infringement damages, if any, instead... you & your attorney might be able to throw a pretty nice party on the amount of their competitors' beer you could buy with infringement damages...

*******
Disclaimer: As always, not legal advice.

"People are not getting (or completely ignoring) the "you can't use this without permission" message."

Which is precisely why just letting it go is a bad idea. I'm not saying this particular case warrants further action, but calling them out on it and referring to the fact that it IS copyrighted (watermark or not) is a good thing.

I use Liebowitzlawfirm.com and they regularly get me settlements from Jerks like that.

Loree:
The only person who knows whether it's worth the time/money/aggravation to pursue an instance of copyright infringment is the copyright holder. It's a judgement call -- there are some games that aren't worth the candle, so to speak. And some games that are.

We all have rights that we don't bother to enforce -- like my next door neighbor's kid trespassed on my lawn to get to school, or someone took a cell phone pic of the art I hung at the local library so they could show it to their spouse because they're considering buying it. Alternatively, my nextdoor neighbor's kid stole my car, trashed it, and left it in a parking lot in Kansas? Or a print store owner came in & took a very high quality pic of my work & started selling prints without my permission? Those... I think would be worth pursuing. Probably. Depending on the circumstances.

A formal legal proceeding is a tool for obtaining justice. It's not the only tool. Like any tool, there are times when it's appropriate to use it, and times when it's not. You use it when it makes sense to use it.
******
Disclaimer: Not legal advice.

I absolutely agree that it's entirely up to the artist to decide what to do. My point was that the more we educate people who infringe on our work, whether we pursue further action or not, the better. My opinion only.

Bill..thanks for that name..they are right in my back yard here on Long Island and I had been meaning to get in contact with them. I have now done so. Thanks again.

Ok, Loree, totally agree with that (-:

Dan,

Google is handling 2 million takedown requests per day? Link please.

Dave

as an aside, I wonder if the chocolate figures are in any way copyrighted. Is permission needed from the company who makes these in any way?

When companies infringe on my copyright, I tend to try to make them pay.

Doing pretty decent at it too.

Good morning boys and girls - so above (or maybe a different copyright thread) I recently mentioned that I saw an image of mine on a tote bag for sale at amazon. I made contact with the seller, informed him/her that they were using my property without my permission but I would be willing to give my permission with a signed contract at a rate of X cents per tote bag sold if they respond back to me by 4/16/16. I got the following response last night.

"Hello friend, thanks for your letter, we will have a consideration. We will contact you again if there's a cooperation. Best regards."

We have an obvious language barrier. Can anyone tell me what he/she means? Is he/she trying to say "... sure, sure, we pay you...we call you later when there is sale..."

Just curious and I dont intend to have a discussion , back and forth or wait for their call. ... Just wondering if anyone can tell me what they mean. My next communication with the criminal will likely be my last. Thanks for your help.

Newwwman, I would just get the image / product removed from Amazon and anywhere else it is being sold.

Thanks Justin but my preference is to NOT have it removed.

Looks like a brush-off to me, sir.....in any language..........good luck.

Thats my first impression...no time until saturday to do what I think I am going to do...so I will let it brew a bit in the far back recesses of my brain and do it on saturday. I am inclined to report them to amazon but I hear that doesnt do much...maybe Ill ask for a one time payment of $3.99 to be done with it..or maybe I will just message the guy to death with an automatic messenger that I have..(targeted spam)..now that I know its a foriegn dude that probably wont understand the language.....I dont know....thanks for your thoughts and ideas

Sounds like they are totally oblivious and think that they would be doing YOU a favor by complying. Is it one of those shops where there are like three thousand products available?

Double U, you just got the brush off

Get the work removed by Amazon.

okay.:)

yes phyllis

Can you give a link to their shop as I am sure that there are many other peoples work there.

Yes Phyllis - this is the amazon storefront - millions of images on things- The store name is DiDiy

https://www.amazon.com/s?marketplaceID=ATVPDKIKX0DER&me=A3EICOTIVH6SMR&merchant=A3EICOTIVH6SMR&redirect=true