copyright info

Dear Christina,#

I am afraid that trying to protect your photos ... in this age of the Web
.... is near impossible! If a good photo is posted somewhere ... and is
appreciated by someone ... it will quickly be emailed about the place within
a matter of days! And the way images can be printed at home ... there really
is very little you can do to police what people do with your proud work.
Just talk to anyone who covers people's weddings ... who give the happy
couple the samples set ... knowing full well that they will be scanned and
printed up!

Watermarking the shots can help ... but that then does distort your image
when being viewed

Alas, it is the way it is nowadays!

Jonathan


"Christina" wrote in message
om...
What's the very best way to go about copyrighting your photos? My
understanding thus far is that if I place a "c in a circle" along with
a date and my name on my image, it is protected. Ofcourse, someone
can crop that out and use it, so I suppose that digimarking my image
will track where it goes and that way I can too. This way I've stated
that it's mine (with the "c in a circle") and I can track where it
goes. Is this the best way OR what do you do? I want to create a web
portfolio of my images. Thank you!
Christina

"Christina" wrote in message
om...
What's the very best way to go about copyrighting your photos? My
understanding thus far is that if I place a "c in a circle" along with
a date and my name on my image, it is protected. Ofcourse, someone
can crop that out and use it, so I suppose that digimarking my image
will track where it goes and that way I can too. This way I've stated
that it's mine (with the "c in a circle") and I can track where it
goes. Is this the best way OR what do you do? I want to create a web
portfolio of my images. Thank you!
Christina

When you take a picture, you automatically own the copyright. A copyright
does not in itself stop anyone from using your photo, but it does give you
the right to take legal action to stop the use and recovery monitary
damages. Registering the copyright can make legal action easier. For
details, go to the Web site of the U.S. copyright office, or the similar
sites for other countries.

"Christina" wrote in message
om...
What's the very best way to go about copyrighting your photos? My
understanding thus far is that if I place a "c in a circle" along with
a date and my name on my image, it is protected. Ofcourse, someone
can crop that out and use it, so I suppose that digimarking my image
will track where it goes and that way I can too. This way I've stated
that it's mine (with the "c in a circle") and I can track where it
goes. Is this the best way OR what do you do? I want to create a web
portfolio of my images. Thank you!
Christina

When you take a picture, you automatically own the copyright. A copyright
does not in itself stop anyone from using your photo, but it does give you
the right to take legal action to stop the use and recovery monitary
damages. Registering the copyright can make legal action easier. For
details, go to the Web site of the U.S. copyright office, or the similar
sites for other countries.

"Journalist-North" wrote in message
...

"PTRAVEL" wrote in message
. com...

"Journalist-North" wrote in message
k...


Close, but not quite right . . .

COPYRIGHT IN THE US:

(snip)

Journalist

---------

Thanks Paul for the clarification on the several points. BTW there is no
general provision for statutory damages in UK copyright law at least not
in
the way it is fixed in the US, but on the other hand the UK has had for
some
years criminal sanctions available that are just coming on line in the US
(e.g. the Piracy Act)

The US has always had criminal sanctions available for copyright
infringement. I'm not familiar with the Piracy Act; I'll have to look it
up.


As to depository services - in the UK and Ireland (at least) they are
virtually the only way, independently and balanced against other evidence
such as publication in a dated published work, and possession of the
original medium (such as film originals - which themselves can be
challenged
as potential copies), to establish date of creation and associate that
with
a particular creator. Media Register, and the commercial services as well,
is ONLY a supplementary to any other evidence available for an otherwise
unregistered UK work - I hoped I had made that clear. In the US it does
NOT
substitute for formal registration but in the UK and Ireland without
formal
registration systems you can guess the problems that can arise even with a
self mailed specimen copy.

There has long been an "urban myth" in the US regarding the so-called "Poor
Man's Copyright." It is, unfortunately, completely ineffective at
preserving rights under US law, except to the extent of providing rather
weak proof of date of creation. There have also been numerous deposit
schemes, some more legitimate than others (the Writers Guild of America runs
such a program). These, too, result in compromising rights of authors.


On the other hand it is also possible in the UK (don't know about Ireland)
to take a minor case to a Magistrates Court (a County Court, as in Small
Claims) where "actual" damages civil claims up to a ca UKP3500 limit are
heard. It does simplify the process of enforcement against copyright
infringement cases except in high value instances.

Though the US has an equivalent system of courts, usually called "Small
Claims," they cannot, unfortunately, hear copyright infringement actions.
Exclusive jurisdiction for such matters is reserved to the federal District
Courts and, unforunately, access to such courts is expensive and will not be
effective unless an attorney is employed.


Hoping you might jump in here.

Consider me jumped in.


Journalist

"PTRAVEL" wrote in message
...

(snip)

On the other hand it is also possible in the UK (don't know about
Ireland)
to take a minor case to a Magistrates Court (a County Court, as in Small
Claims) where "actual" damages civil claims up to a ca UKP3500 limit are
heard. It does simplify the process of enforcement against copyright
infringement cases except in high value instances.

Though the US has an equivalent system of courts, usually called "Small
Claims," they cannot, unfortunately, hear copyright infringement actions.
Exclusive jurisdiction for such matters is reserved to the federal
District
Courts and, unforunately, access to such courts is expensive and will not
be
effective unless an attorney is employed.

Hoping you might jump in here.

Consider me jumped in.

Journalist

---------

Just to amplify a bit on the court situation here in the UK for civil
claims. The first and lowest level of possible hearing for civil claims, but
also the fastest, is as mentioned - a Magistrates Court (and filed as a
small claims case). That is a very fast approach (in and out in a month or
so depending on the court's case load) and inexpensive - filing fees about
UKP75 (about USD150) only and you can represent yourself easily enough as it
is relatively informal and designed to be that way - very much like US small
claims cases in local courts. This is often called the "fast track" method
in the UK. Cases may even be heard by a "lay magistrate" - that is a
non-lawyer part time judge appointed from the community and trained to
administer cases at this level not unlike a justice of the peace in US
terms.

For more substantial claims there is what are called a medium track
procedure and a long track procedure. Medium track would require a lawyer
(solicitor) to represent you and takes longer because there is a discovery
process with statutory response / waiting times that must be complied with.
So either or both parties can stall to the last minute at every turn. Takes
months generally to the hearing but allows claims up to ca UKP15,000 (ca USD
25K). May be heard in a Magistrates Court or moved, by motion, to a Crown
Court in some cases. This is a much more formal procedure than the fast
track one. A case can generally be done and over in 6 months or so from the
initial filing.

For high value or high profile cases of civil claims there is, lastly, the
long track procedure. Requires a solicitor initially, and probably a
barrister as well (trial lawyer) and in the ultimate a QC (Queen's Council -
a senior trial lawyer) assisted by a barrister, and these cases are heard in
Crown Courts (eq in the US to a state level court / superior court - or -
federal district court) not Magistrates' Courts. In these cases everybody is
in for the long haul as they can take a year, or more, sometimes a lot more,
and involve several preliminary hearings and space for pre-trial motions.
They are expensive but the advantage on balance, in high value cases, is in
that there generally will be no upper limit on the amount of the claim
("unlimited damages" can be awarded). The down side is that the loosing
party is often made responsible for the other side's legal fees as well as
their own.

At all three levels, in addition to money damages, the respective court can
issue injunctive relief as well.

Journalist

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 18:40:53 +0000 (UTC), "chesham"
wrote:

Dear Christina,#

I am afraid that trying to protect your photos ... in this age of the Web
... is near impossible! If a good photo is posted somewhere ... and is
appreciated by someone ... it will quickly be emailed about the place within
a matter of days! And the way images can be printed at home ... there really
is very little you can do to police what people do with your proud work.
Just talk to anyone who covers people's weddings ... who give the happy
couple the samples set ... knowing full well that they will be scanned and
printed up!

Watermarking the shots can help ... but that then does distort your image
when being viewed

Alas, it is the way it is nowadays!

Dicing, layer cloaking (putting a trasparent layer over the image) and
rightclick elimination, plus html or script-based obfuscation can make
life a little harder for an image thief.

Another site requires registration, which does help to concentrate the
visitors mind, but also irritates or drives away those who cannot be
bothered with that.

You should also ensure that robots are excluded from indexing the
pictures.

Finally, if putting pictures online, it may be a nice gesture to offer
them under a Creative Commons licence such as this one
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/
As most people would probably use it privately, with or without
permission, and just maybe, a licence which allows limited
permissions, would be a better reminder of what is not permitted.

"Christina" wrote in message
. com...
What's the very best way to go about copyrighting your photos? My
understanding thus far is that if I place a "c in a circle" along with
a date and my name on my image, it is protected. Ofcourse, someone
can crop that out and use it, so I suppose that digimarking my image
will track where it goes and that way I can too. This way I've stated
that it's mine (with the "c in a circle") and I can track where it
goes. Is this the best way OR what do you do? I want to create a web
portfolio of my images. Thank you!
Christina


--
I may be dozzzy, but take the ZZZ's out to mail me
http://www.junkroom.freeserve.co.uk/jvc2080.htm - 2x2x24 CD-RW troubles

If you drop a cactus, don't try to catch it!