Another Reason to Post Watermarks on your Photos

The copyright world is abuzz about the recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit opinion in Mavrix Photographs, LLC v. LiveJournal, Inc. The primary interest is that the court held that LiveJournal may not be eligible for the DMCA 17 U.S.C. § 512(c) safe harbor for users’ posting of copyrighted photographs on its “ohnotheydidnt” website when LiveJournal’s moderators first reviewed those submissions.

Even if LiveJournal proves that the photographs were posted at the direction of the user (thus meeting one of the requirements for the § 512(c) safe harbor), LiveJournal must also show that it lacked both actual and red flag knowledge of the infringements. See 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(1)(A). Actual knowledge is when the service provider had subjective knowledge. For example, actual knowledge can come from a DMCA takedown notice. So it’s usually good to send a takedown notice to the internet service provider when you find an infringement.

Red flag knowledge is whether a reasonable person would objectively know of the infringements. In the Mavrix case, many of the photos at issue had watermarks on them, such as those identifying Mavrix’s website, “Mavrixonline.com.” The court held that LiveJournal may therefore be liable for copyright infringement for having red flag knowledge from the watermarks that its use of the photographs was unauthorized.

This is another one of the many reasons to post watermarks on your photos!

Check Photo Attorney on Lynda.com, in the Lynda.com Article Center, and on Twitter!
Share

Tell Congress to Vote “Yes” on H.R. 1695

From the APA (published here with permission):

Last week, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) introduced the H.R. 1695, The Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act

The bill passed out of the Judiciary Committee in a nearly unanimous 27 to 1 vote!
It will now go to the full House of Represenatives for a vote.

The bill would elevate the Register of Copyrights (previously held by Maria Pallante) to a position appointed by the President with the Advice and Consent of the Senate. We believe this will provide a more transparent and accountable selection process. The Copyright Office has been operating without a permanent Register since last October. It is urgent that this issue is addressed so efforts to modernize the Copyright Office can move forward.

It is vital that Congress hears from creators about the importance of this issue. APA and organizations representing creators from across the spectrum of the creative community have already voiced their support.

Take Action here through our partners at the Copyright Alliance 
http://copyrightalliance.org/get-involved/add-your-voice/

The vote is due to happen this week or next.  

Here are the members of Congress (members of the Judiciary Committee) who voted for this bill and have shown their support for the creative communities:

Rep. Karen Bass, D, CA-37
Rep. Steve Cohen, D, TN-09
Rep. John Conyers Jr., D, MI-13
Rep. Ted Deutch, D, FL-22
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D, TX-18
Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D, WA-07
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D, NY-08
Rep. Ted Lieu, D, CA-33
Rep. Jerry Nadler, D, NY-10
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D, MD-08
Rep. Brad Schneider, D, IL-10
Rep. Eric Swalwell, D, CA-15
Rep. Andy Biggs, R, AZ-05
Rep. Ken Buck, R, CO-04
Rep. Doug Collins, R, GA-09
Rep. Ron DeSantis, R, FL-06
Rep. Blake Farenthold, R, TX-27
Rep. Trent Franks, R, AZ-08
Rep. Louie Gohmert, R, TX-01
Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R, VA-06
Rep. Trey Gowdy, R, SC-04
Rep. Darrell Issa, R, CA-49
Rep. Mike Johnson, R, LA-04
Rep. Jim Jordan, R, OH-04
Rep. Raul Labrador, R, ID-01
Rep. Ted Poe, R, TX-02
Rep. John Ratcliffe, R, TX-04

Check Photo Attorney on Lynda.com, in the Lynda.com Article Center, and on Twitter!
Share

Copyright Registration Tip

 

It’s a given that registering your copyrights is a good thing. While the eCO system has made it easier, you sometimes may get stuck in the process.

Which is what happened to me recently. While uploading the deposit copies for a registration, it looked as though I lost my internet connection. Thinking that the files didn’t get submitted, I uploaded them again. When the Copyright Office (“CO”) sent me emails with the “Acknowledgement of Uploaded Deposit,” I realized that I had duplicates.

Uh, oh.

The eCO website states:

Please note: Files cannot be returned or deleted once uploaded. To avoid delays and/or a later effective date of registration, please verify the following before uploading a copy of your work(s):

Since I couldn’t delete the duplicates, I contacted the CO, stating:

When uploading files for a registration, the website appeared to freeze. Therefore, I unintentionally uploaded some files twice. Do I need to fix this or should I close the registration? Thank you!

The CO responded within 3 days:

Duplicate files are not a problem, however after filing, reply with the application case number so we can place a note re this matter.

I closed the registration and gave the CO the application number.

Case closed! Thanks, CO!

Check Photo Attorney on Lynda.com, in the Lynda.com Article Center, and on Twitter!
Share

The Unique Work Made for Hire Relationship in California

Many clients think that they own the copyrights to the photos when they hire a photographer. But, in the United States, if the photographer is not the client’s employee (a w2 employee instead of a w9 independent contractor), the photographer owns the copyrights unless the photographer first agreed in writing and the work falls into one of 9 statutory categories.

Circular 9 from the U. S. Copyright Office explains: a work made for hire (WMFH) is ”a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire.” The Circular emphasizes that when the work is created by an independent contractor, both parts must be satisfied–that is, the agreement must be in writing AND the work must fit one of those 9 categories. See also 17 USC 101.

On the other hand, if photos are taken by an employee within the scope of employment, then the photos are a WMFH and the employer is both the “author” and owner of the copyrights.

More companies now insist that they own the copyrights to avoid future infringement claims or licensing expenses, which can be a disadvantage to shooting WMFH photos.

However, in California, Labor Code Section 3351.5(c) provides:

Any person while engaged by contract for the creation of a specially ordered or commissioned work of authorship in which the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire, as defined in Section 101 of Title 17 of the United States Code, and the ordering or commissioning party obtains ownership of all the rights comprised in the copyright in the work.

Likewise, California Unemployment Insurance Code Sections 686 and 621(d) provide that:

Employer also means any person contracting for the creation of a specially ordered or commissioned work of authorship when the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire, as defined in Section 101 of Title 17 of the United States Code, and the ordering or commissioning party obtains ownership of all of the rights comprised in the copyright in the work. The ordering or commissioning party shall be the employer of the author of the work for the purposes of this part.

Therefore, you technically are an employee of any company that hires you to take photos pursuant to a WMFH agreement. Fortunately, the company then must provide workers’ compensation insurance to cover you if you get hurt on the job.

Because California companies have additional responsibilities when you’re an employee (such as payroll taxes and mandatory reporting to the state), they likely will try to avoid the traditional WMFH agreement by asking you to later transfer the copyrights or allowing you to keep some of the rights.

Whatever the agreement, be sure to review it closely so that you understand your rights.

 

Check Photo Attorney on Lynda.com, in the Lynda.com Article Center, and on Twitter!
Share

Copyright Office Launches Blog

Today the U.S. Copyright Office launched its new blog, Copyright: Creativity at Work. The blog supports the Office’s 2016–20 strategic plan of sharing Office activities and issues of public interest through expanded social media. Blog posts will feature such topics as Office news, registration practice updates, law and policy developments, copyright basics, and copyright lore. In the inaugural post, Acting Register of Copyrights Karyn Temple Claggett reintroduces the people and the work of the Copyright Office. Subscribe to Copyright: Creativity at Work here.

Check Photo Attorney on Lynda.com, in the Lynda.com Article Center, and on Twitter!
Share

Copyright Office Proposes Amending Regulations to Address Disruption of Copyright Office Electronic Systems

The U.S. Copyright Office is proposing to amend its regulations to address the effect of a disruption or suspension of any Office electronic system on the Office’s receipt of applications, fees, deposits, or other materials.  The amended regulations specify how the Office will assign effective dates of receipt to materials attempted to be submitted during a disruption or suspension of an Office electronic system.  In addition, the proposed rule specifies how the Office will assign effective dates of receipt when a specific submission is lost in the absence of a declaration of disruption, as might occur during the security screening procedures used for mail that is delivered to the Office.

The Office seeks public comments on the proposed regulations that will be considered in promulgating a final rule.

The proposed regulations and instructions on how to submit a comment are available here. Written comments must be received no later than April 3, 2017, at 11:59 p.m. Eastern time.

Check Photo Attorney on Lynda.com, in the Lynda.com Article Center, and on Twitter!
Share

Copyright Office Extends Comment Period for Moral Rights Study

The U.S. Copyright Office has published a Federal Register notice extending the deadlines for public comment in connection with the Office’s study on the moral rights of attribution and integrity.  Public comments are now due no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern time on March 30, 2017, and reply comments are now due no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern time on May 15, 2017.  Additional information, including instructions on how to submit a comment, is available here.

Check Photo Attorney on Lynda.com, in the Lynda.com Article Center, and on Twitter!
Share

Copyright Office Launches Updated Website

The U.S. Copyright Office has launched its updated website, www.copyright.gov. The website has been redesigned to be more organized, more responsive, and easier to digest. It now features a new header with global navigation and search, and expanded width in all sections to maximize screen usage. Several individual pages have been consolidated for improved navigation. A new page, History and Education, includes a wealth of information such as the History of Copyright Law, Past Reports and Publications, and Past Announcements.

Looks good!

Check Photo Attorney on Lynda.com, in the Lynda.com Article Center, and on Twitter!
Share

Sierra Trading Post’s Photo Contest is No Bargain

Sierra Trading Post (STP) is a great place to pick up some bargains on outdoor goods. While you have the chance to win a $200 STP Gift Card from its photo contest, just by entering means that you may get less than you bargained for.

Specifically, when you enter STP’s photo contest, you agree to the Terms and Conditions, which state in part (emphasis added):

ENTRANT’S GRANT OF RIGHTS: By participating in the Promotion, each entrant irrevocably grants Sponsor and its agents and successors and assigns a non-exclusive, unlimited, worldwide, perpetual, royalty free, transferable license and right (but not the obligation) to reproduce, publicly perform, distribute, exploit, publicly display, and otherwise use the Submission in any way, for any reason, and in any and all media (including but not limited to the Contest Site), without limitation, and without further notice, consent or consideration to the entrant. Without in any way limiting the foregoing, Sponsor shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to modify and make derivative works of the Submission for any purpose which Sponsor deems necessary or desirable, and each entrant irrevocably waives any and all so-called moral rights they may have therein. Sponsor shall have the right to freely sublicense its rights hereunder, in whole or in part, to any person or entity. Sponsor shall retain the rights granted in each Submission even if the Submission is disqualified or fails to meet the Submission Requirements.

There’s not much that STP can’t do with your photo submission. At least you keep you copyright and you’re not restricted with using it. Just seems that STP is getting the benefit of the bargain here!

Hat tip to Mike Calabro.

Check Photo Attorney on Lynda.com, in the Lynda.com Article Center, and on Twitter!
Share
1 2 3 4 5 103