Can Yall sign this Petition against SOPA and PIPA

[PFactorDave]

A persons image is not automatically protected by copyright law. You can't make a judgment about copyright infringement unless you know the source of the material.

Was the image...

1)  Created by the Government?
2)  Published before 1989 without a copyright notice?  After 1989, notice is no longer required, copyright is implied.
3)  Published before before 1963 for some images, published before 1923 for all?
4)  Ineligible for copyright?  (If there is any artistic component such as lighting, camera angle, composition, etc then the image is eligible for copyright.  Almost all photographs are eligible.)
5)  Dedicated to Public Domain?  Only if the photographer issues a written notice specifically dedicating it to the Public Domain.

If the answer is NO to all of the above questions, then the photography is copyrighted.

[PFactorDave]

I've always figured you for a pretty smart guy and, as such, should know that nothing is copyrighted until a copyright has been applied for and granted.

 

This is misleading.  Registration of a copyright with the government is not required for copyright, it simply provides prima facie evidence of copyright allowing the copyright holder to collect statutory damages and attorneys fees.  

In this country, the registration can even occur after the infringement has already occurred, allowing the copyright holder to sue for actual damages and lost profits.

So, if you think not applying for a copyright on a photograph means that anyone can take it and use it however they want, you are incorrect.

I believe the fee for registering a copyright is $35.  But that isn't per image.  I know a few guys who are still doing a lot of national news and celebrity stuff who register their work annually as a collection.  So, everything they did for the entire year gets registered for $35.

Personally, I do not.  The type of work I am doing these days and the way I have structured my fees make it so I am not really that interested in enforcing my copyrights.  I make my money on the initial sale, then I don't worry about it anymore. 

If I ever got into celebrity type work, that would change.

[VonMessa]

This is misleading.  Registration of a copyright with the government is not required for copyright, it simply provides prima facie evidence of copyright allowing the copyright holder to collect statutory damages and attorneys fees. 

In this country, the registration can even occur after the infringement has already occurred, allowing the copyright holder to sue for actual damages and lost profits.

So, if you think not applying for a copyright on a photograph means that anyone can take it and use it however they want, you are incorrect.

If one can prove that one is the originator of the material, of course.

However, there is also something in this country called due process.  The way the current SOPA/PIPA is written, this would be circumvented.

[PFactorDave]

If one can prove that one is the originator of the material, of course.

However, there is also something in this country called due process.  The way the current SOPA/PIPA is written, this would be circumvented.

That proof is simple these days for professional photographers.

As I said, I haven't read the SOPA/PIPA, so you may be correct about it circumventing due process.  I agree that that is wrong.

That said, all the little kiddies who are freaked out because they are afraid they are going to lose their YouTube, they need to understand that unlawful use of copyright material is likely to be cracked down on hard in the near future, and the music industry is leading that charge.  YouTube is definitely in the cross hairs.  SOPA/PIPA may not be how it is done, but something will be coming.

The little kiddies need to be educated on what the law is, so they aren't surprised when it smacks them upside the head.  

[Dichotomy]

See Rule #14

[PFactorDave]

Dichotomy,

I just want to restate that I am not taking a stand on SOPA/PIPA.  I don't know enough to do so intelligently. 

But wow...  I am the little guy, and according to you I shouldn't ever put any of my work out where the public can see it?  Because if I do I should just expect it to be stolen and used without my permission?

And at what point does a company become large enough that they should lose their legal protections?  Who gets to decide where that line is?

I agree that due process must be respected in however these copyrights are enforced.  So maybe SOPA/PIPA may very well be the wrong approach.  I don't know.

But all this big talk about the little guy and the evil corporations has no place whatsoever in the law...  Period.  The law should be the law, without regard to whom it is being applied.

[VonMessa]

Dichotomy,

I just want to restate that I am not taking a stand on SOPA/PIPA.  I don't know enough to do so intelligently. 

But wow...  I am the little guy, and according to you I shouldn't ever put any of my work out where the public can see it?  Because if I do I should just expect it to be stolen and used without my permission?

And at what point does a company become large enough that they should lose their legal protections?  Who gets to decide where that line is?

I agree that due process must be respected in however these copyrights are enforced.  So maybe SOPA/PIPA may very well be the wrong approach.  I don't know.

But all this big talk about the little guy and the evil corporations has no place whatsoever in the law...  Period.  The law should be the law, without regard to whom it is being applied.

Should be...

It isn't, though...

[Dichotomy]

But wow...  I am the little guy, and according to you I shouldn't ever put any of my work out where the public can see it?  Because if I do I should just expect it to be stolen and used without my permission?

I say you run the risk of it being used without your permission.  That's the rub for you isn't it?  If you put it out there you might as well expect that somebody is going to use it without your permission.  If you don't nobody knows who you are.  This is a position I have quite a bit of empathy for.  As I stated above you have to decide if you want to take legal action if you find somebody using your work without your permission.  That's a long and expensive process as I'm sure you're aware. 

Again.  I simply not for more laws that will be misapplied and poorly managed in order to satisfy the wants of large corporations.  But, as previously stated, something will more than likely get passed under the radar as a rider to another law that will be equally pervasive but unseen or noticed until it goes into effect. 

 

[Delirium]

That said, all the little kiddies who are freaked out because they are afraid they are going to lose their YouTube,

No one really cares, unless it affects them directly.

I read story where a developer was working on a program to revolutionize word processing, back when Wordperfect was king. Unfortunately (and stupidly) this developer left the software on a FTP which was accessed and the entire completed program was 'sharewared' all over the net. Can you imagine working on something for a year or more, only to see it made close to worthless overnight?

A persons image is not automatically protected by copyright law. You can't make a judgment about copyright infringement unless you know the source of the material.

That is true, your image is not protected unless you have a reasonable expectation of privacy (ie you're in a bathroom). Once someone takes a picture of you in public, that image belongs to the photographer.. just be happy that you're not a celebrity.

[PFactorDave]

See Rule #14

[VonMessa]

But it should be.  Do we give up on even trying because there are inequities in the system?

<SNIP>

And that's as deep as I want to get into that.  I don't want to get Skizzified.  

Too late

The golden rule.

He who has the most, gets to make them...

[Dichotomy]

Too late

The golden rule.

He who has the most, gets to make them...

this is more true than you know.  The owner of my companies wife (city councilperson for over 15 years) sometimes runs off with diarrhea of the mouth about wealth such as 'if you're rich you can get away with murder in this city'.  Just the kind of morale boosting thing to say to a guy who was just thinking of whether to pay the mortgage or his electric bill out of this weeks check. 

[PuppetZ]

I don't feel that it is possible for me to discuss this topic without violating rule #14.

Nope.

 

[PFactorDave]

 

Nope.

 

Apparently not...   

[Dichotomy]

Looks like we flew too close to the sun PF. 

So, how about those niners?