Photo Ownership - legal questions

[Dietrich, Robert J.]

Folks:
 
I've been reading this thread very carefully.  I still get confused as to
what is legal, but I think I'm learning the difference between right and
wrong - another of life's little lessons.
 
My confusion in the legal stuff is in #3 below:  the photographer can go
after someone if "he has registered the photo for copyright with the U.S.
Copyright Office."  How many people take that step for all their
photography?  Or is there a "blanket" protection that one can acquire.
 
As to the right and wrong, I won't do it without permission.  But I also
have a concern about postings that I obtained permission for.  I put Fred's
picture on my web site and someone copies it and posts it on another site
without permission.  Then another and another.  Pretty soon Fred is spending
his retirement years chasing people who are using his hard earned pictures
without permission and I feel responsible.  I say "hard earned" with respect
and appreciation of what you went through to get those pictures.  So I have
a thought; would it help if I "imprinted" the owners name on the photos
before posting them?  Similar to what Jerry Appleman does --
http://davesrailpix.railfan.net/pitts/htm/pitt645.htm
<http://davesrailpix.railfan.net/pitts/htm/pitt645.htm> . That way if
someone copies it they have to take the credits also.  Or does that destroy
the artistic value?
 
I think that on my web I'll be sure to get permission and give credit for
all the photos I post.  If I find them other places on the web I'll point to
them and give as much credit as possible.
 
Thanks.
Bob Dietrich
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Fred W. Schneider III [mailto:fschnei at supernet.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2000 6:29 PM
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Subject: Re: Photo Ownership - legal questions
 
THANKS VERY MUCH, BOB.  THIS IS ONE TO FILE. 
FRED. 
brathke at juno.com wrote: 
I have received an opinion from my attorney friend, who specializes in 
intellectual property and Internet law, and her comments are reprinted 
below. 
Bob 7/4 
----------------------------------------------------------- 
Online copyright infringement is the source of lots of new law.  I'll try 
to address your questions one at a time: 
1.      If you took a photograph, you obviously have all the rights of the 
copyright owner--to reproduce, sell, publish, etc.  If you "bought the 
rights to it," what you are allowed to do with it will depend on which 
rights are spelled out in the agreement under which you bought it.  If 
it's not specified in the agreement how the photo is to be used, it is 
not generally safe to assume that you can do everything you want with it. 
 The best course of action is to discuss it with the copyright owner, or 
better yet, have it spelled out in the agreement.  Having purchased the 
rights to a photo does NOT give you the right to give permission to 
someone else to use it, on the web or otherwise.  It is the copyright 
owner's exclusive right to give permission to use the copyrighted photo. 
You are right that a photo should not go on the web without the 
photographer's permission.  If there is no photographer's name on the 
photo and it is very old (50+ years), it MAY be in the public domain and 
probably would be okay to use with a credit to the person from whose 
collection it came.  If the photo is not that old but has no 
photographer's name on it, a similar attempt at credit is a good thing to 
do. 
2.      The person "publishing" the photo--i.e., the website owner--has the 
responsibility to assure that whatever he publishes is not violating any 
other's rights under copyright law. 
3.      If a photographer sees his photo in an unauthorized use on a website

and he has registered the photo for copyright with the U.S. Copyright 
Office, he typically would send a letter asking the website to cease and 
desist from using the photo.  If the request to remove isn't successful, 
he can sue in a federal court for up to $10,000 per infringing use (or 
the profit gained from the unauthorized use, whichever is greater), plus 
costs and attorney's fees to file suit, plus enjoin any further use and 
request a court order for the destruction/termination of any infringing 
uses.  If he didn't register the photo with the Copyright Office but just 
put the (c) symbol or notice on the photo, he can still enjoin further 
use and request a court order for the destruction/termination of any 
infringing uses, but can't get any money damages. 
4.      Placing the copyright symbol on a photo DOES give the photo some
legal 
protection.  It puts the world on notice that the photographer owns the 
rights in that photo, and that if they use it without authorization, he 
has the rights of a copyright owner.  This is true for websites, too. 
The law does not require that you actually register with the Copyright 
Office to claim exclusive rights to a copyrighted work--and gives you the 
right to stop infringing uses.  Registration lets you claim those rights 
AND sue in federal court AND get money damages and attorney's fees.  This 
is as true for websites as it is for any other copyright-able work, such 
as a photo, book, painting, sculpture, etc. 
5.      After the photo is scanned and uploaded, the photo with the
copyright 
line no longer at hand, you really should make SURE that the information 
on that copyright line somehow follows the picture attached as a caption. 
 If the copyright owner can show that it's his photo that was used 
without permission, and that copyright line (called "Copyright Management 
Information") is not included, the infringing use could fall under the 
new No Electronic Theft Act, which provides additional money damages and 
criminal prison terms(1-6 years) for online copyright infringement. 
Hope this answers more questions than it raises, Bob.  If you do have any 
other questions, please feel free to e-mail me.  And if there's anything 
else I can do for you, please let me know. 
------------------------------------------------------------- 
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Dietrich, Robert J. wrote: 
Dave has already given me permission to use anything on his site but I 
realize he 
doesn't always obtain proper permission.  So what should I do? 
------- 
There's a difference between what may be the "legal thing" (as contrary 
to 
threats which have been made by company lawyers when they didn't 
like the way something had been linked to, there's no case law on this 
yet 
that I can find or that's been cited) and what may be the "right thing", 
which 
you'll have to decide. Intellectual property battles can get nasty so I 
try to stay away from the whole deal altogether, generally making 
available stuff which is directly mine, but also now old documents from 
expired companies. I suppose it's possible someone owns rights to 
PRCo and PRR documents, but I'm not going to worry about it for now. 
 ------------ 
________________________________________________________________ 
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! 
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! 
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit: 
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj <http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj> .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.dementix.org/pipermail/pittsburgh-railways/attachments/20000706/0f07e57a/attachment.html