Campos & Davis Photos (photos@campos-davis.co.uk)
Wed, 03 Nov 1999 13:17:44 +0000
You have the right idea in the USA. In UK a photographer is not entitled to
punitive damages for infringement of his copyright. That is, you can only
charge what you would have charged for the reproduction in the first place
had the company sought your permission. A good defence barrister would
argue that the "going rate" for reproduction of a photo would be an amount
of money that would be payable throughout the publishing industry. No
damages would be awarded. As you can imagine this stinks and means that no
only do you have to find people who steal your work, when you have done so
you can only claim an amount of money which a court would consider the
industry standard payment. Because infringement of copyright is a criminal
offence in the UK, not a civil one, the threat of private criminal action
usually has the right effect on getting someone to pay up. The police,
however, are not interested in prosecuting so there has, to my knowledge,
never actually been a case brought to court.
The photographic community do not have themselves to thank for this
situation, which is much clearer now than before the 1989 copyright act, but
it was only the idea of music being pirated that made the artists copyright
society seek chances to the law which have benefited us.
Campos & Davis Photos
6 Cranbourne Road
London N10 2BT - UK
Tel: + 44 181 883 8638
Fax: +44 208883 8638
email: photos@campos-davis.co.uk
www.campos-davis.co.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeffrey D. Mathias <jeffrey.d.mathias@worldnet.att.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: 03 November 1999 12:42
Subject: Re: copywrite on net.
> Jonathan Hall wrote:
> >
> > How do I protect my images on a web site from being stolen? I wish to
start
> > a site and would like to put my images on but am afraid some one will
use
> > them without my permission is there any way to prevent or at least make
it
> > difficult for one to do so?
>
> Campos & Davis has the right idea. A digital watermark will provide you
> with some sort of proof of ownership. However there is nothing to
> prevent one from using the image as is (watermark and all). The essence
> of copyright is that IF someone derives a benefit from one's work, the
> author may claim damages (revenue that might otherwise be their own).
>
> However, realize that not all countries recognize international
> copyright law (some do not even have copyright protection within their
> own boundaries. The best recourse is a preemptive strike of low
> resolution.
>
> For those places that do adhere to copyright law, there is another
> catch. One must make money off the infringement. This must be enough
> gain so as to fund a legal professional and staff and the pursuit
> through the court system. This is unlikely unless the culprit is a
> large company like, as Judy put it, a Walmart.
>
> For the lonely, bankrupt, thieven photograbber, the threat of being
> labeled a plagiarist may serve as a deterrent. Not to many publishers
> will deal with known plagiarists (bad for their reputation).
>
> And concerning the alt-processes, an electronic facsimile is nothing
> like an alt-print.
>
> The best of all situations seems to be to put the low resolution,
> digitally watermarked, images out there. Hope that others can
> appreciate them and purchase prints. And, not to different from
> fishing, just wait for some big, wealthy corporation to grab one and sue
> the pants off them. I guess your worry should be that perhaps some
> corporation will sell millions of your image and will make you and your
> attorneys some profit.
>
> "Nothing ventured, nothing gained."
>
> P.S. If someone really wanted to steel your work, it would seem more
> likely that they could purchase a print and duplicate it. They would
> get much better results and could claim they were under the impression
> that they had purchased rights to use.
>
> --
> Jeffrey D. Mathias
> http://home.att.net/~jeffrey.d.mathias/
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun Dec 05 1999 - 17:09:23