Pixtus - Photography Forum, Photographers, Photo Tips

lvolkjr · **Copyright -** 03-10-2010, 11:29 PM

I know this has been discussed many times, but now we are all wiser and have more experience.

Should I be placing a copyright signature on my photos whether or not I'm in the business?
Tell me your thoughts.

I have heard a couple of stories, one good and one bad. Both people have Flickr accounts.

The good: the person gets an email from Playboy Magazine wanting to purchase a picture of a Chinese market scene for an article they're writing. This person does photography for fun. after some negotiating, settles on a price, and gets a check in the mail.

The bad: the person goes to a commercial showing of new private jets and takes some creative angle shots of the planes. post them, next day sees them in the local paper. Calls up and complains, all they did was print a retraction.

Killjoy · 03-10-2010, 11:40 PM

Watch the videos and take the advice from a REAL Intellectual Property Attorney and get the straight scoop on Copyright, Model Releases, and Shooting in Public.

Basically, putting the copyright on the image does nothing for you.
You have to have registered it as being copy-written to be able to claim it's yours and be able to sue for it.

RochinPhotography · 03-11-2010, 09:20 AM

Alan - As far as I know if you press the shutter button you hold the copyright. No need to have it registered. NOW it does make things MUCH easier to fight if you do have it registered.

I know many people who have won copyright fights without registered images. Keeping all original files with exif intact helps too.

In the "bad" case I'm sure if an attorney was involved things would of gone differently.

Being its not your "business" its hard because you likely don't invest in an attorney. If you are in the "business" 3 good things to have would be insurance, accountant, and attorney.

Another reason I like Zenfolio is the huge watermark it allows the images to have unless the print is purchased.

Killjoy · 03-11-2010, 10:10 AM

Watch the video I linked to, and listen to the Lawyer.

RochinPhotography · 03-11-2010, 02:23 PM

makes sense. The "for sure" win is to have it registered. But you don't HAVE to register every image. Only if it is used. Then you can register it and and sue.

jcambray · 03-11-2010, 04:12 PM

What I heard on the video was that it doesn't hurt to have the copyright on the image. A point that Ed didn't cover is how many people may be deterred just by seeing the copyright on the image. After all, who really wants to go to court over this, so why not put the copyright on -it's free protection. Plus, I have to believe that having the copyright on the image would help in any lawsuit. According to Ed, if the image is timely registered, the court can award "discretionary" damages. It would be hard for the infringer to argue that he/she/it didn't know the image was protected if the copyright is right on it.

IMHO there is no downside to putting a copyright on the image.

Lilikoi the cat · 03-11-2010, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcambray

It would be hard for the infringer to argue that he/she/it didn't know the image was protected if the copyright is right on it.

"... but your Honor, the copyright was not there after I photo shopped it out!"

Something else you can pick your brain about Lowell...
Some of the sites do not list photos being posted as being copyrighted but "all rights reserved". Figure out if that might help you.

You have to post photos in order to have people look at them first.

Here is some blithering...
plastering them all over the internet puts it into the public domain and blah,blah,blah.. legalese blah. Wifey will contact the owner of the image and ask for non-profit use in her course. Only a few requested money and most made sure there would be no money made.

lvolkjr · 03-12-2010, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilikoi the cat

Something else you can pick your brain about Lowell...
Some of the sites do not list photos being posted as being copyrighted but "all rights reserved". Figure out if that might help you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilikoi the cat

You have to post photos in order to have people look at them first.

I know I'm struggling whether to stay with Flickr or just start a Smug Mug account.

:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilikoi the cat

Here is some blithering...
plastering them all over the internet puts it into the public domain and blah,blah,blah.. legalese blah. Wifey will contact the owner of the image and ask for non-profit use in her course. Only a few requested money and most made sure there would be no money made.

If she works for a charity or Non-profit can you put a reasonable price figure on that and claim that figure on your taxes as a charitable contribution?

Killjoy · 03-12-2010, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lvolkjr

I can photoshop out the Copyright symbol just as easily as I can photoshop out anything that says "All Rights Reserved".
Especially if I can just crop the image. :p

Quote:

I know I'm struggling whether to stay with Flickr or just start a Smug Mug account.

:

Apparently Flickr doesn't abuse your photos either

Quote:

With respect to photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Service other than Yahoo! Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Service solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available. This license exists only for as long as you elect to continue to include such Content on the Service and will terminate at the time you remove or Yahoo! removes such Content from the Service.

But I've been pretty happy with my SmugMug account.
I can put things in protected folders (such as the nude models that I shot), and I can also put them in hidden folders.
For instance, there are some images in my account that you would never see, unless I linked to them.

Also, Smugmug allows for a custom watermark to be put on your images.
So if someone tries to copy it from your page, the watermark is there.
If they BUY an image from your Smugmug site (such as a print), then the watermark is not on the print.
If you place your watermark in Photoshop before uploading, then it's part of the image.

Killjoy · 03-12-2010, 06:50 PM

Oops, there's more.....

Quote:

Yahoo! does not claim ownership of Content you submit or make available for inclusion on the Service. However, with respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Service, you grant Yahoo! the following worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive license(s), as applicable....

So yeah, you are giving Yahoo free reign to use your images for whatever they see fit.

jcambray · 03-12-2010, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lvolkjr

I know I'm struggling whether to stay with Flickr or just start a Smug Mug account.

:

Lowell, why are you thinking of leaving Flickr? I am in the midst of the 14 day free trial with SmugMug and am trying to decide whether to keep it.

lvolkjr · 03-12-2010, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcambray

Lowell, why are you thinking of leaving Flickr? I am in the midst of the 14 day free trial with SmugMug and am trying to decide whether to keep it.

Somebody suggested to me that you give up rights to the photos that you post or something like that. I'm sure I'll hear from that someone if I misspoke what they told me. That's why I haven't posted pics in a while and the fact this site won't let me do it directly.