_{Seeing many friends have their art stolen or honetly used without knowing the laws, and having it happen a few times to me I thought I would start this page on copyright issues. I will continue to add to it as I find more info or interesting articles. Feel free to link to this page or use any of it, but remember I am not a lawyer}

Links

Great blog from a photography attorney [link] lots of great info and reading
How to register a photo [link]

Explanation of Terms & Laws:

COPYRIGHT This is the OFFICIAL Copyright Site - [link]

FAIR USE You can only claim FAIR USE when it meets the US Government Copyright Office Law which is stated HERE [link] (official US Copyright Office Information Site)

PERMISSIONS You must ALWAYS get permission first before using an aritsts work. This is not just a rule here on DA (FAQ #157: Can I use things created by other people in my submissions?) but it is the law. It also needs to be in writting of some form. If it is for commercial use you will most likely receive a contract outline the terms and conditions of use.

STOCK IMAGE Stock images are images that are posted somewhere with the express intent that it may be used by other artists in their own artwork. Use of these images in this fashion are subject to the artist's license, which may or may not require the payment of fees. This is directly from DAs FAQ #157: Can I use things created by other people in my submissions? again. If the image does not state on there any where that it is stock and you have permission do not assume it is. Most stock images (other than those found on DA) are not free to use either. They will have fees and certain conditions on use. Even the free ones here on DA will most likely have some conditions attached to it, most notably that you can not make money off it.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE The use of a copyright notice is no longer required under U. S. law, although it is often beneficial. Because prior law did contain such a requirement, however, the use of notice is still relevant to the copyright status of older works. Use of the notice may be important because it informs the public that the work is protected by copyright, identifies the copyright owner, and shows the year of first publication. Furthermore, in the event that a work is infringed, if a proper notice of copyright appears on the published copy or copies to which a defendant in a copyright infringement suit had access, then no weight shall be given to such a defendant's interposition of a defense based on innocent infringement in mitigation of actual or statutory damages, except as provided in section 504(c)(2) of the copyright law. Innocent infringement occurs when the infringer did not realize that the work was protected. The correct method of displaying copyright notice is: © 2002 John Doe where the year is the year first published.

PUBLISHED From the copyright site - The offering to distribute copies or phonorecords to a group of persons for purposes of further distribution, public performance, or public display constitutes publication. So it is the interpratation of many when you post an image on your own site or a portfolio site such as DA you are in fact publishing your work.

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DCMA) Info on how to contact a site host to have a site removed for copyright infingement [link]


DERIVATIVE WORKSA “derivative work,” that is, a work that is based on (or derived from) one or more already existing works, must also be a new work started from scratch and not incorporating the original or parts of. Such as creating a painting on a blank canvas while referenceing another piece of art.

From the copyright site - <sub>Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create, a new version of that work. The owner is generally the author or someone who has obtained rights from the author.
In otherwords you still need to obtain perrmission to reference or produce a derivative of original art. Examples being a movie based on a book still needs permission. A drawing based on a photograph aslo still needs permission from the original copyright holder. see [link]

DA does not actually spell out in there faq's about obtaining permission for derivative work, but it is the law so falling back on it when an artist confront you on this is not a defense. You can still be leagaly libel.

COPYRIGHT HOLDERIs quite simply the person who created the work.

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

There is a misunderstanding in model photography that the model automatically gets copyrights or shared copyrights. This is completely false....only the photographer is the copyright holder. How ever un-fair it may seem the model is the subject not a creator. This is not to say that copyright can not be transfered to the model, all or partial, or that the photographer can agree to share the copyright (should be done in writing) So when you are looking for permission to use an image you can ask the model but be sure to ask if she has the ability to say yes to your request. 9 out of 10 times she does not. Typically the model is granted RIGHTs that spell out what she can do with the images. Rights are not the same as holding copyrights.

------------------------------------------------------------------
I need to register my work and pay big fees to have a copyright A common myth that effects most artist is the belief that their work is not protected, that they have to pay some big fee to be copyrighted. THIS IS VERY FALSE! the moment you click the shutter, or create a piece of art. [link]

The way in which copyright protection is secured is frequently misunderstood. No publication or registration or other action in the Copyright Office is required to secure copyright.....Copyright is secured automatically when the work is created, and a work is "created" when it is fixed in a copy or phonorecord for the first time. (from the copyright website)

You can register your works for better protection. It creates a public record of your copyright claim and makes it easier for monetary damages. All you need to do is fill out a short form [link] pay a fee (I think it is $30 now) and include a cd of the images. You know how many images you can get on a cd? All the have to be is low res copies of your images. So you can register a lot of images for $30

If I give credit I don't need to get permission False. Merely giving credit is not a defense to copyright infringement which, unlike plagiarism, has legal, not ethical, consequences. Copyright infringement is the unauthorized use of someone else's copyrighted material. By contrast, you can plagiarize material not protected by copyright simply by taking credit for it.

I don't need permission because I'm going to adapt the original work. False. [link] Copyright law grants copyright owners the exclusive right to control modifications of their works. If you add a new layer of copyrighted material to a previously existing work, you have created a derivative work. If done without permission of the copyright owner you, may have violated the owner's copyright.

If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation. False. Whether you charge can affect the damages awarded in court, but that's main difference under the law. It's still a violation if you give it away -- and there can still be serious damages if you hurt the commercial value of the property.

If a work is on the Internet, it is in the public domain and can be freely copied and distributed. False! The internet may be a new phenomena and developed long after U.S. copyright laws were enacted, but it is not exempt from copyright law. Courts do not have any difficulty applying traditional copyright laws to web sites and the internet. The owner of a copyright enjoys certain exclusive benefits, which include the rights to reproduce, distribute and display a work. Without the consent of the owner of a copyright, it is copyright infringement to place the work on the internet or to download/copy it from the internet.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
What I typically do if I find my work being used, and recommendations for others to follow.

1) They will get a nice letter from me, friendly, not mean, just simply making them aware that I am the artist and be requested to remove it completely (give a reasonable time frame). I don't care where they got it, now that they are made aware they are required to comply. Note*** Even if they are claiming the work to be theirs it is in your best interest to keep all corospndence professional, nice, clear and to the point. All email/letters can and will be used in any future legal battles

2) If they refuse to comply with my "rules" (and the LAW) then they will recieve my official Cease and Desist Letter, and they will have a certain amount of time to comply.

3) If they still refuse to comply then contact their ISP/Host and Copyright Infringement will be reported.

4) In MOST cases their website/blog/journal/gallery account will be closed/banned (ISPs will NOT tolerate this, they know the law and they will NOT put themselves at risk.) If it is an email group the host (aol/yahoo/etc) will be contacted and I have been informed by more than one ISP that warnings from the ISP will be sent out and if they do not comply their account will be "frozen." If this is a group on yahoo/msn it will most likely shut down/closed. Remember keep all emails/letters profesional, stating all the facts and back up you can.

5) You can also get a lawyer involved at this point, espically if they are benifiting financially form your works. If you have when its a good idea to cc them in all emails.

In the end the ISP will 99.9% of the time side with the artist because they KNOW the LAW and they want to protect thier own asses. Copyright Infringement is a big word to them, if they get shut down because they do not comply they will loose thousands, trust me, they don't need their account to keep them afloat.





More to come as I find other articles and info</sub>