One of the many reservations photographers have to putting
up any sort of official objection – that is, to file a lawsuit in court – is
the cost and time associated with doing so. Further, their objections include
the cost of hiring an attorney, and then paying them again, and again, and
again. Then, there’s the reservation because, well, they didn’t register the
copyright before the infringement. This all leads up to the idea that copyright
protections don’t really help the individual photographer, they’re designed to
protect corporate interests, so why bother doing anything at all?
This apathy has caused a downward spiral in copyright
registrations, and the inverse is the case for infringements. Photographers
feel helpless, and some fear sharing their work in any capacity online will
result in large-scale theft of their work, so they don’t.
Enter small claims court. In civil proceedings, if you have a
disagreement that is minor (some jurisdictions cap it at $10k - $30k), you can
come before a judge, present your case and evidence, and the judge will decide.
It’s Judge Judy without the cameras and studio lighting. No jury, and, no
expensive attorneys if you’re an individual.
It’s quick, and usually painless. In the world of copyright, to date,
you have had to file a federal lawsuit and jump through a lot of hoops and hire
a seasoned lawyer to help you through the process. If the The “Copyright Alternative in
Small-Claims Enforcement Act of 2017” or the “CASE Act of 2017” becomes law,
that won’t be your only option.
This solution - the
Copyright Small Claims Board, proposes a small claims procedure would allow for
an individual copyright holder to bring a claim where the cap on the award is
$30,000, and does not require you to hire an attorney to represent you. While I
would recommend you hire an attorney in matters such as this, in some
instances, an attorney is not necessary.
And, as far as how much it would cost you to file a copyright claim? The
act stipulated “a filing fee in such amount as may be prescribed in regulations
established by the Register of Copyrights, which amount shall be at least $100,
shall not exceed the cost of filing an action in a United States district court.” So, for $100 or a bit more, and without an
attorney, you can get the ball rolling where someone has infringed your
work.
This looks to be an amazing solution where a website or t-shirt vendor or even a magazine has stolen your work. Has someone stolen your work and posted it on their instagram account? Here’s your solution, provided it becomes law. The Copyright Alliance has more information here - - and visit this link – a streamlined way for you to contact your member of congress.
This looks to be an amazing solution where a website or t-shirt vendor or even a magazine has stolen your work. Has someone stolen your work and posted it on their instagram account? Here’s your solution, provided it becomes law. The Copyright Alliance has more information here - - and visit this link – a streamlined way for you to contact your member of congress.
(Continued after the Jump)
David Trust, CEO of the Professional Photographers of America explains it thusly:
Tom Kennedy, Executive Director of ASMP stated that “the introduction of the CASE Act is a critical step in the several years-long effort by ASMP and its colleagues in the creative community to correct an historic inequity in the copyright law: the failure of the law to provide individual creators with an effective and affordable means to combat infringements of their creative works—an especially vexing problem in a digital environment where piracy occurs at the click of a mouse.”
The NPPA, back in 2012, pointed out that “While much of the advocacy by NPPA deals with access issues and the right to photograph and record in public; it cannot be understated that without the ability to affordably protect one’s copyright visual journalists will soon be out of business,” Mickey Osterreicher, NPPA general counsel said. “That is why it is so important that the Copyright Office support a new initiative that will address this critical issue,” he added. The NPPA went on to note that "As many photojournalists face situations involving copyright claims that amount to a limited amount of damages, the NPPA strongly supports the creation of a copyright small claims court system by the Copyright Office that would permit photojournalists to resolve such claims in an expedited and cost effective manner."
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
No comments:
Post a Comment
COMMENT GUIDELINES
Every month, tens of thousands of visitors come to Photo Business News, and approximately 2,000 readers get PBN via RSS feeds. As we approach three years of blogging (in one form or another) PBN has matured, and has, as one might expect, attracted some less-than-mature readers, which, in turn, turns to commenters with their own agendas.
Following are our Terms of Service (TOS) for commenting on the blog posts:
-------------------
1. Comment Spam - we have had a ton of spam from countries like Russia, Japan, China, and so on. It interferes with the discourse, and is one of the prime reasons we are moving to moderation. All one need to is look back a few months to see the blog posts I haven't had time to clean up from this type of spam to see that moderation is needed for this reason alone. In addition, if your comment is not germane to the point being discussed, it too becomes spam. It will be deleted.
2. Over time, some pretty irrational challenges and attacks have been levied against me, and that's ok if you disagree with me, just don't make it personal on me, or anyone else. Doing so means your comment won't make it out of moderation, so don't waste your time. In addition, it would be a shame for you to make a really great point that everyone would benefit from reading, and include personal attacks on me, or other commenters, because we don't edit comments, they're either in, or they're out.
3. Over at the Photo Business News Flickr forum, (here) there are almost 2,000 members and a good opportunity to get your questions answered there. If you have a suggestion for a blog topic, there's a link to make that suggestion on every page of the blog.
4. It is the policy of Photo Business News that if there is a YouTube, Vimeo, Viddler, Hulu or any other video service online, we can post it here using the embedding players for those services (which often insert ads into the playback). We can't know if what might normally be considered a copyrighted work that you would think might not be allowed on, say, YouTube, in fact has been agreed to between the copyright holder and YouTube. So, if you have a question or concern, visit those sites, and flag the content you believe is problematic. In addition, we adhere to standards for quoting and citing other content, with attribution and where possible, a link to that content.
5. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS - For several years now, we've given free reign to anonymous commenters, and a small fraction of those were beneficial to the readership. It is our opinion that anonymous commenters would best be from someone who, for example, should their identity be revealed, could pose job security or economic problems for them. So to that end, unless your comment is significantly beneficial, anonymous comments won't get moderated in. If you wish to make an anonymous comment and you want to send me an e-mail identifying yourself (which I will not reveal), that would be helpful, and will increase your chances of getting your comments posted. Oh, and don't go creating a fake Blogger ID just to get in - blank Blogger ID's are just one step removed from plain anonymous postings. The more discourse where people know who each other are, the better. David Hobby, of Strobist fame summed it up best in his TOS: "Nothing looks more weenie and pathetic than sniping, critical, anonymous comments."