Copyright Infringement?!?!?

[mass]

I've got a question for the smart people out there. Take a look at this web page: http://www.cadillacmichigan.com/pages.php?tabid=4&pageid=113&title=Morel+Mushrooms

The domain name is currently expired, but if you do a google search on massmorels (mywebsite and obvious online name), you'll see in the forth row from the top.. my logo with that identical pic: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=i...0&bih=922&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&cad=b I designed that logo. Took the photo, created the font, and made the logo.. all on my own. I am.. massmorels.

The photograph on that page is MINE. I took that photo.. it's even used in the logo on my website.
They did not ask permission to use it. Nor did they note me as the photographer. My question is this.. is it still copyright infringement if my domain has expired? The photos there cannot be viewed at this time. Which means they saved the photo, and reused it PRIOR to the site's expiration. And I do have a copyright logo and this on my frontpage,"The photos on this site are copyright protected and cannot be used without my permission."
Can't this land me a nice paying lawsuit?

I know I need to get the domain renewed in order to get to those pics and my logo. I'd obviously then have the proof I need. But I want to make sure this is even a big deal before following through with anything.
Thanks for any help you knowledgeable people can offer.

 

[Dexenthes]

Honestly I don't have an answer to your question, but I do wonder why it matters?

I could care less if any of my photos get used by other people, I'd probably just be flattered. Once you put them on the web to be viewed there are so many multitudes of ways that they can be recreated and tampered with. It would seem helpless to try and keep them your own.

 

[jesse]

but I do wonder why it matters?

If you could get a payment of let's say 200 USD per photo per month per website that uses the photo, would that matter for you as the copyright owner?

 

[Heli]

I dont really know a lot about this stuff but did you copyright the photo?

 

[Not a Number]

For works created in the US or by a US Citizen you cannot file a copyright infringement suit in US courts unless the works have been registered with the US Copyright Office before the infringement or within 3 months of the publication of the work. Nor can you collect any attorney fees or damages unless the works were registered.

Note to Photobucket users according to their TOS:

• If you make your Content public, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to copy, distribute, publicly perform (e.g., stream it), publicly display (e.g., post it elsewhere), reproduce and create derivative works from it (meaning things based on it), anywhere, whether in print or any kind of electronic version that exists now or later developed, for any purpose, including a commercial purpose.
• You are also giving other Users the right to copy, distribute, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce and create derivative works from it via the Site or third party websites or applications (for example, via services allowing Users to order prints of Content or t-shirts and similar items containing Content, and via social media websites).

 

[Tony Paroubek]

From the copyright.gov
"Copyrightable works
include the following categories:
1 literary works
2 musical works, including any accompanying words
3 dramatic works, including any accompanying music
4 pantomimes and choreographic works
5 pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works
6 motion pictures and other audiovisual works
7 sound recordings
8 architectural works
These categories should be viewed broadly"

"Copyright Secured Automatically upon Creation
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. See the
following note. There are, however, certain definite advantages
to registration. See Copyright Registration on page 7."

Page 7 -
"In general, copyright registration is a legal formality intended
to make a public record of the basic facts of a particular copyright.
However, registration is not a condition of copyright
protection. Even though registration is not a requirement for
protection, the copyright law provides several inducements
or advantages to encourage copyright owners to make registration.
Among these advantages are the following:
• Registration establishes a public record of the copyright
claim.
• Before an infringement suit may be filed in court, registration
is necessary for works of U. S. origin.
• If made before or within five years of publication, registration
will establish prima facie evidence in court of
the validity of the copyright and of the facts stated in
the certificate.
• If registration is made within three months after publication
of the work or prior to an infringement of the work,
statutory damages and attorney’s fees will be available to
the copyright owner in court actions. Otherwise, only an
award of actual damages and profits is available to the
copyright owner.
• Registration allows the owner of the copyright to record
the registration with the U. S. Customs Service for protection
against the importation of infringing copies. For
additional information, go to the U. S. Customs and
Border Protection website at www.cbp.gov/.
Registration may be made at any time within the life of
the copyright. Unlike the law before 1978, when a work has
been registered in unpublished form, it is not necessary to
make another registration when the work becomes published,
although the copyright owner may register the published
edition, if desired."

From another site because the goverment one doesn't really address internet law...
"Wait, don't I have to send a form to the government too?
That is voluntary. The Copyright Office will catalogue your site if you want them to. It'll cost 20 bucks plus some shipping. No, this is not required in order to be able to bring a civil suit against someone else for copyright infringement. You may go after damages to recover losses. However, you may only attempt to get punitive damages (punishment money) if you are registered with the Copyright Office. "

 

[Whimgrinder]

mass: first of all, the photo is afforded copyright protection by law, simply by your authorship of it, it's not something you have to "apply" for.
And yes, you have every right to enforce copyright when someone takes your photo(s) and uses them without obtaining your permission.
Next item, lawsuits: pointless for a single copyright infringement. Your costs would exceed your reward. All you can sue for is lost revenue, and it would be difficult to persuade anyone that you experienced "lost revenue" if you don't actually make a living selling your photos.
What you can do is file DMCA to force a take-down of the photo. (see link provided) That is if you want to go straight to legal action without first contacting the infringer and asking for removal of the photo. (would you feel better about it if they provided attribution? Maybe just having your name on it would suffice? It's unlikely they will offer to pay for usage rights but you can ask. A one time usage fee of something in the vicinity of fifty bux would not be unreasonable.) If you don't care to negotiate usage terms with the infringer, then go straight to filing DMCA to force removal.

This is an issue I have to deal with annually, often several times a year. It used to be eBay was the worst offender, but for some reason it rarely happens there now. Usually it is some online nursery that steals my work. I always contact them first and request a usage fee, but that almost always fails. In that case, I ask them to take the photo off their web site. Many claim it was ignorance of copyright or "an error their web designer made", and agree to remove it. Once in a while I get a really snotty response that suggests the infringer feels entitled to take whatever they want from the web and use it as they please. Those people find themselves forced to remove stolen content via DMCA.

Having your work stolen and misused is never flattering, it's just theft. Period.

 

[Av8tor1]

Now mass, you cant really complain when you are using someone else's original artwork for your avatar...

 

[mass]

Honestly I don't have an answer to your question, but I do wonder why it matters?

I could care less if any of my photos get used by other people, I'd probably just be flattered. Once you put them on the web to be viewed there are so many multitudes of ways that they can be recreated and tampered with. It would seem helpless to try and keep them your own.

I am slightly flattered. Though it does say on my site,".. may not be republished without my permission."
I simply want to be asked to use my photos, and/or credited for the photography. I can think of a few other sites out there with my photography being used. But all of them have asked permission. I always say yes.. as it is quite flattering.

I dont really know a lot about this stuff but did you copyright the photo?

yes.

Now mass, you cant really complain when you are using someone else's original artwork for your avatar...

I was waiting for that one.
However, I'm not using it on my website, republishing it as my own, or taking credit for it as being my art in anyway.

 

[Whimgrinder]

I was waiting for that one.
However, I'm not using it on my website, republishing it as my own, or taking credit for it as being my art in anyway.

However, by using it out of context of its original form, and without providing attribution, you are venturing into the same territory as the person using your photo without providing credit to you as its author. Using someone else's artwork as an avatar on a discussion forum isn't really any different; you are just making an arbitrary distinction between the two usage scenarios, and I don't see much difference, to be honest. If you use someone else's work without attribution, then it is a copyright infringement, by definition. Period.

I am just stating facts as I perceive them, not at all interested in arguing this point.

 

[mass]

However, by using it out of context of its original form, and without providing attribution, you are venturing into the same territory as the person using your photo without providing credit to you as its author. Using someone else's artwork as an avatar on a discussion forum isn't really any different; you are just making an arbitrary distinction between the two usage scenarios, and I don't see much difference, to be honest. If you use someone else's work without attribution, then it is a copyright infringement, by definition. Period.

I am just stating facts as I perceive them, not at all interested in arguing this point.

point taken..

 

[larry]

Very interesting. Yes, your photo is copyrighted as soon as you took it, no need to register it. But NaN mentioned photobucket. When you upload your photos to photobucket or any other photo sharing site, are you giving up some or all of your rights?

 

[Brie]

For works created in the US or by a US Citizen you cannot file a copyright infringement suit in US courts unless the works have been registered with the US Copyright Office before the infringement or within 3 months of the publication of the work. Nor can you collect any attorney fees or damages unless the works were registered.

Note to Photobucket users according to their TOS:

^^^^ And this is why I do not use photobucket.

---------- Post added at 08:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:49 AM ----------

I cant really add anything new to this discussion, as all pertinent statements/facts have been made... But I know how ya feel... Like Paul, I used to have my photos stolen constantly.. Kinda part of using the internet and having photos online.. Thieves will always take em and use em without permission. Best you can do is do what Paul says..

 

[Peatmoss]

I keep all my photobucket albums private and uncopyable. This mitigates the possibility of them being used.

 

[mass]

I have absolutely no problems with my pics being used. Like Dex pointed out, it is quite flattering. However, I just want people to credit me for my photography, or ASK PERMISSION! How hard is that?

 

[RL7836]

Very informative thread - thanks to all contributors. I learned some good stuff in here.

 

[mass]

Very informative thread - thanks to all contributors. I learned some good stuff in here.

x2. All I could remember from the class I took on copyright law was,"Copyright is automatically applied to anything fixed into a tangible form of expression." It was on the final..

 

[Tony Paroubek]

I would just contact them and ask you be credited or have the photo removed. The visitors bureau probably has no clue. Looks like some other company put the website together (link on the bottom of their homepage... brightbridge studios). They may have gotten the photo from somewhere else? Where did they get a copy without your text on it? Highly doubtful they would bother to take the photo from your website and then remove the text.. Did you have the photo posted elsewhere as well?

 

[mass]

I would just contact them and ask you be credited or have the photo removed. Did you have the photo posted elsewhere as well?

That's exactly what I did. Just want to either be noted as the photographer, or have the photo removed.
I had the original photo posted on my website as well.

 

[Whimgrinder]

I have had numerous people/entities simply crop off any copyright watermark the image displayed before using the photo. I find it appalling that they clearly made an effort to circumvent copyright and deny attribution. A certain nursery in the UK was astonishingly rude when confronted about the infringement and offered a very "Griggsian" response*

*Look up Judith Griggs on wikipedia; its a remarkable story and is somewhat pertinent to this discussion.