Copyright Infringement Reminder

[Barberian]

I read this thread with amusement. Looking at the avatars, I see many images (Tweety, the bear, many Disney characters, etc) that are obviously copyrighted by major corps (Disney, etc.) who I doubt would allow usage of these images without expressed written permission and probably compensation.

I am semi-professional photographer (semi as in - yes I've sold photos, but don't do it for an income). If one of my photos showed up in a commercial outlet of any kind without my permission, and compensation, I'd be on the war path.

I even had to work out a deal with Anthony a while back to post a few of my images here and not give away my ownership/copyright(s) because of the ULA of this site.

Unfortunately, I sometimes forget to look for, or think about any copyright(s) info on images I've posted here. Yes it's hypocritical, and I will strive to be less complacent in the future. I apologize to any copyright holder, and this site if I have done it in the past and will do my best to never do it again regardless of how much I want to share a beautiful or funny image.

 

[Nicolette]

If the illustrator has been dead for a really long time (I think it's fifty years?)

I read 75 years somewhere recently Jen.

 

[anthony]

There is nothing to be nervous about... just understand copyright and know your legal rights.

Most corporations and such don't go chasing copyright infringement for their images, as they its all publicity / advertisement for them. Many images are released for just that... for people to spread around and market the story behind the image.

Some people do sell their images for a living, thus you can find breaching their copyright will piss them off, thus they have a right to enforce it. You will find people host illegal images, copyright, software, hacks and cracks and all sorts of illegal stuff, in countries that do not acknowledge copyright. That is how they get away with that. Host in say... Romania, and you can send a host all the DMCA's you want, they don't care, nor will they respond. These places sell what is called 'bulletproof hosting' for exactly that reason. Law doesn't exist in the country for such issues, and/or, it simply isn't enforced.

Unfortunately, this server is hosted in the US, which does recognise copyright infringement, thus must act on such as a US company.

 

[Deleted member 1860]

I read that any image over 120 years old is considered free for the using. When I had a facebook account, my timeline image (whatever the heck it's called), was a painting from the mid 1800's. It wasn't commercial, promotional, copyright infringing, and well, maybe it was on other's timelines, but who the hell is going to check a billion other facebook profiles?!?!

 

[Whitneys story]

@SOL, In reality it just takes one monger, who is angry at the world; and thinks they can make a fast buck. Sad but true!

I have a card making program, I own it. It allows use of the art that comes with it. We just need to make wise choices.

 

[Deleted member 1860]

Really, people need to chill. Once it's out there, it's out there! People need to keep closer reign on their images, and if they don't want them swiped, then watermark them! Geesh. I'm not excusing the swiping of images, but c'mon people, take two steps to protect your images instead of being naive enough to believe that there's ANY control over a digital image once placed online. Ok, stay away from the copyrighted stuff. I guess I'm more referring to those who think they have an ounce of security or privacy online. (This is why I never share photos online of myself, and when I have kids, I wont be randomly posting their pics, either)

 

[Barberian]

I'm not picking on you. I am using your post as a "Devils advocate" because I've seen this argument many, many times. Please don't be offended, it is not my intention.

I have a bad habit of making long posts, so I'll put the summary at the top instead of the end to spare people who don't want to read the whole thing.

Summary: Just because you can find it on the internet does not mean the owner gave permission, or will allow free usage.

----------------------------

I read that any image over 120 years old is considered free for the using.

It's not always that simple. It's unlikely a digital image is over 120 yrs old (or 30'ish yrs - begining of the digital age). The original image may be XXXX yrs old, but someone took the time to make a digital copy. If the original image is exempt from copyright(s), the digital image is the property of the person or business who made it wether or not they want to enfoce thier copyright.

Once it's out there, it's out there! People need to keep closer reign on their images, and if they don't want them swiped, then watermark them! Geesh.

Personal case in point - When I was still a truck driver I had a video camera always on when the truck was moving. Another truck crashed right in front of me. I mean RIGHT in front of me almost killing me also. I didn't want the video relased to the general public out of respect for the driver and trainer who were killed in the accident.

[DLMURL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wifwg6xWVAU&feature=plcp"]My video - warning very graphic.[/DLMURL]

I provided a copy of the video to my dispatch supervisor so he could show it to the company safety department. I told him on no uncertain terms the video was copyrighted by me and NOT to be copied in any way. Within 48 hrs the video had been posted on a trucking forum, and it went viral throughout the community. It was on countless forums, video sharing sites, discussed on trucking radio sites, the list goes on. To date over 175,000 people have viewed the video on my youtube acct. and over a million views at other places.

There is/was no way to stop the continued unauthorised copying and posting of the video, or to get it back. As Scared said "once it's out there, it's out there".

A side benefit of the unauthorised and uncontrolled release is it has probably saved many lives, both in the trucking industry and out. It is used by most trucking companies in thier training programs (unathorised, but it's too big to fight).

Summary: Just because you can find it on the internet does not mean the owner gave permission, or will allow free usage.

 

[Deleted member 1860]

Well... If you want to be SUPER technical, we're all breaking the law... Where is YOUR avatar from?!? (Well save those who use pics of their dog and such)

Maybe Anthony should ban the use of avatars?

 

[Barberian]

Technically speaking -

The original image my avatar is based on was on a site that said the images were free. Do I KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt that all the images contained on the site were intended for free distribution by the copyright holder(s)? No, I don't. The site was a commercial site that had a lot of adds on it, a standard internet business model. Earn money from advertising instead of charging for images, which can easily be copied without a cash transaction. Being a commercial site, by inference I am speculating that they have a legal interest in not breaking the law.

I then photoshop'ed the image into a negative image and added some effects. The "new" image is by technicality (American law) became copyrighted by me as I took a free image and created a new one. I have no interest in any copyright(s) of this image.

Because I posted the image here as my avatar, by the ULA of this site it has become the property of Anthony.

So... with all that said, to my knowledge I am not breaking any laws using this image.

 

[Barberian]

This is a "can of worms". Two posts ago in this thread I was simply trying to clear up some common misconceptions. Anthony said the server is hosted in the USA, and had to comply with American laws. There are many misconceptions about copyright laws. Also copyright laws vary from country to country. My post was not intended as a personal attack on anyone. Maybe I used poor judgment in quoting a person instead of just making a general statement.

The following is my personal opinion:

Anthony and Nicholette provide this site free of use. The mods spend countless hours keeping it running smoothly. As good guests we should do our best to be gracious guests and not cause any undo work or stress of dealing with violations of the ULA.

I'm going to try and not post in this thread again. If anybody has any questions on copyright laws, I suggest Google'ing it and selecting reputable sites to learn more.

 

[anthony]

Because I posted the image here as my avatar, by the ULA of this site it has become the property of Anthony.

That is incorrect, as per the legal agreement of PTSD Forum and governing laws of most western legal systems. You cannot sign over copyright on an image that is already owned, as you have no such rights.

There is a difference between posting original content versus copyright material. If you posted a snippet from a book, you cannot assign that authors copyright to PTSD Forum. By posting your original content upon this site, you assign copyright to me.

There is also a further notation to copyright, in writing, for all members: [DLMURL]https://www.ptsdforum.org/c/pages/help-copyright/[/DLMURL] which helps clear up some concepts.

I provided a copy of the video to my dispatch supervisor so he could show it to the company safety department. I told him on no uncertain terms the video was copyrighted by me and NOT to be copied in any way. Within 48 hrs the video had been posted on a trucking forum, and it went viral throughout the community. It was on countless forums, video sharing sites, discussed on trucking radio sites, the list goes on. To date over 175,000 people have viewed the video on my youtube acct. and over a million views at other places.

Actually, your thinking is also incorrect. You can have them all removed by sending a DMCA to each and every web hosting provider that the content derives, including YouTube.

You have to simply have the original works. You may have to get a lawyer to cite such original works first, then refer all matters to them in the DMCA notice. You can strike a DMCA yourself and send it to all hosts / companies that host that video file. DMCA is unfortunately, guilty first, prove innocence later. Upon a DMCA the content must be removed from public, even if argued, until such time as the dispute is settled. That is the law for any country who recognises DMCA.

For example, if that image that was recently reported for copyright violation was actually my own, and I could prove I did it and have the original works, then I would have to remove the image from public visibility first, then send the evidence stating I was the original copyright holder, at which point the DMCA would then be disputed. The sender of the DMCA would have to negate that evidence / court action required. Once a ruling was settled, the content would go live again / get deleted if copyright could not be proven.

I had a person try this with me for their content on this site. It failed instantly, the hosts lawyer dismissing their DMCA claim as frugal the moment I sent them the legal terms and conditions in which the user registered, agreeing to. That statement that I owned the copyright, therefore there was no DMCA violation, as I owned the copyright and didn't have to take any further action. If the member wanted to try and take it further, DMCA was no good. It would have had to of been court action here in Australia.

DMCA will work IF you actually do own the copyright and can prove it. Sending frugal attempts will get you nowhere... sending evidence of copyright works ownership will get you everywhere.

If you can prove you own that video, are the original author and DID NOT consent to its reproduction, then every single website hosting it, you can force them all to remove it.

 

[anthony]

Picture threads locked... seriously, no more. Users are posting images they don't own and putting PTSD Forum at risk. No more of them.