I got side tracked tonight as I was looking for non airline camera gear containers for transporting my equipment. It's about copyrights and our images.

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap4.html#412

§ 412. Registration as prerequisite to certain remedies for infringement11

In any action under this title, other than an action brought for a violation of the rights of the author under section 106A(a), an action for infringement of the copyright of a work that has been preregistered under section 408(f) before the commencement of the infringement and that has an effective date of registration not later than the earlier of 3 months after the first publication of the work or 1 month after the copyright owner has learned of the infringement, or an action instituted under section 411(, no award of statutory damages or of attorney’s fees, as provided by sections 504 and 505, shall be made for —

(1) any infringement of copyright in an unpublished work commenced before the effective date of its registration; or

(2) any infringement of copyright commenced after first publication of the work and before the effective date of its registration, unless such registration is made within three months after the first publication of the work.
-------
So this is the law? We can't get any compensation unless we register each image?


And this is intersting reading too:
http://blogs.photopreneur.com/5-nightmare-...asesorporations steal our images unless we copyright each image beforehand?

http://www.asmp.org/commerce/legal/copyright/index.php

That´s true.
You do own the copyrights [but not for all the countries], but you do not have a PUBLIC RECORD of them, which is why in order to do any kind of claim or public statement your word [as a physical persona] does not count, but a public record does.

That´s the reason for placing a public record of copyright for each individual image. It is noteworthy that you images CAN be used as a basis for other work as far as they are sufficiently altered, because most of those records and rights management processes are based on reasonable similarity or resemblance [which, for instance, is what happens with music sampling].

So if a public rights management office agrees that somebody who has altered a picture you made by changing the colour of certain areas/shadow cast ... sufficiently, you can not then claim monetary compensation.

Section 412 addresses statutory damages and attorney fees. What this means is that if you are not registered you cannot get your attorney fees, and you must prove up your damages rather than taking advantage of so-called "statutory damages" which are essentially assumptions about your damages. You still are entitled to your actual damages.

The ASMP link is a good one. Consult a lawyer if you have a real problem.

That means you need to convert all your images to the format in the guidelines, such as jpg, and submit them on a DVD. I wonder how long it will take to convert 40, 000 files from CR2 to 500 x 500 jpgs? Hmmm, how depressing.

I don't have 40, 000, but I feel sorry for those who have 10, 000 images in slide format. I even feel sorry for those with 10, 000 CR2 files in 200 folders.

Is there a program that will parse ALL images in all subfolders, and then make a copy of each like PS's batch converter, while you sleep? I don't think PS's batch option parses subfolders.

I understand the idea behind this, but it's sort of like, "Yeah, you own the copyright, but you can't prove it's your image, so MEGACorp gets to use it all they want--sorry sucker.

Which sort of goes along with all the rest of the deals where government and big enterprises are a rule unto themselves with the "little guy" left holding his dick when it comes to holding his own.

I have long believed that the reasons for this sort of thing are very simple: little guys take up too much time. I can give you a personal example of this. When I started up on my own, back in ´66, in Britain there was a tax called purchase tax, and you could register yourself, if you had a business, and get an exemption certificate which entitled you to purchase film without this tax as long as you used it only for the purposes of your business and did not sell it on. Fair enough, only, to do this, you had to keep a register of what you used and tie it up to your job-book which had to show how many films you shot per job.

One day, the man from the ministry (not a cleric) arrived and demanded to see my two registers. I produced them and it turned out that thorough as I though I had been, I could not account for two cassettes of film, this over a year or so of shooting. The Man spent a whole afternoon going through my business´s paperwork in a chase for about three shillings worth of unaccounted tax. I rest my case.

I expect that the guy´s bosses were as aware as he was of the absurdity of the equilibrium between his salary and three shillings worth of tax that had been unaccounted for, but you get the picture. We are just too much of a pain in the ass for any government - it is much better from their point of view to have their top gun working with a corporation´s top gun - mucho dinero comes home and fewer problems, even, perhaps, a political donation somewhere along the line and a peerage afterwords, to boot.

So whether copyright or anything else, why would they care?

Rob C

Dude, I think you misunderstand. If you don't register before publication and infringement you cannot get attorney's fees and statutory damages. Statutory damages are not all that. You can prove your damages which might be much more than the statutory damages. I sued a book publisher for publishing a travel guide that was illustrated exclusively with my images. They got the images from a tourist and visitor board. The images were not registered. I didn't get attorney fees. I did prove my damages which were the contrived value of the images. I got all of the profits from the sale of the book and all of the copies of the book withdrawn and destroyed. They ended up republishing the book with my images, but I was paid. So I made out. And proving you own the copyright is easy if you have a copy of it. Just ask Megacorp where they got the image. By the way, companies carry insurance policies for these kinds of mistakes, so it really is no skin off of MegaCorps back to pay you. Most of the time they infringe its because of some low level dumbass trying too hard to save a buck or its a flat out mistake.

Check out this interview for an attorney's perspective:

http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2008/archives/1645

As has been stated, this is for attorney's fees and statutory damages. You are still allowed to go after actual damages. But note that in order to bring suit in Federal court, you WILL have to register the work, even if it's after the fact. Added to that burden is the fact you'll need to prove, in court as a matter of law that YOU own the copyright to the image in question. Also note that the lack of attorney's fees mean YOU have to pay your attorney, up front, to file suit and then pay out of the actual damages you "may" win. That "may win" aspect makes it very important to register your work BEFORE infringement as opposed to after...

Registering your copyrights is a burden, yes...but there will soon be an online registration for doing so. Pros who know what they are doing set up a monthly or quarterly registration process to register their copyrights as unpublished works. You can register as many images as will fit on a DVD for a single registration fee. Note, the same method is NOT available for registering published works.

Not sure why you are so surprised that there are hoops you have to jump through in order to protect your copyrights...npthing is ever free and easy. It's what being a pro is all about-knowing about your profession.

That makes more sense, and I'm glad you cleared that up.

After the above explanation, I'm more clear about this. It's still going to take a lot of time to register 10, 000 slides, given you need to either photograph them on a light table or scan them. I'm hoping the online registration comes on line, although copying them to a DVD is no big deal. The big deal is getting all the RAW files converted to jpgs. A program that would convert them all, from the ROOT directory, would then make the entire process easy, since you could set the batch and go to bed.

I actually think I tried a copy of ACDSee a long time ago that would parse all directories under the root, and then display all of the files together. Then you could "select all" and do a batch convert. I have a really simply approach to file management, which goes like this, and is independent of software organizers, like Lightroom, etc.

Photography
--1DS3
---People
-----2008_08.23._Kate

and so on. All of the images are named with the folder name of the respective folder:
e.g.: 2008_08.23_kate-001.CR2

Anyone know of a program that will parse sub directories and batch convert RAW to jpg?

Read it again, carefully. It says no award of "statutory damages or attorney's fees." It does not say "no award at all." "Statutory damages" are award amounts specifically called out in a statute to be awarded when a plaintiff who has registered his/her work proves the infringement. "Attorney's fees" are...well, attorney's fees. Non-statutory damages may be awarded to a non-registered copyright owner who proves infringement.

So what exactly is "statutory" from a legal perspective?

Statutory means "found within a statute." A statute is a law on the books. As to copyright infringement, the law regarding "statutory damages" is found in 17 U.S.C. Section 504(c, reproduced below for your reading enjoyment and edification and that of the forum members generally. I am not your lawyer. This is not legal advice, but merely educational material including the reproduction of a federal statute for benefit of the forum. Consult an attorney if you need legal advice, as suggested by a previous poster.

(c Statutory damages.

(1) Except as provided by clause (2) of this subsection, the copyright owner may elect, at any time before final judgment is rendered, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the action, with respect to any one work, for which any one infringer is liable individually, or for which any two or more infringers are liable jointly and severally, in a sum of not less than $ 750 or more than $ 30,000 as the court considers just. For the purposes of this subsection, all the parts of a compilation or derivative work constitute one work.

(2) In a case where the copyright owner sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that infringement was committed willfully, the court in its discretion may increase the award of statutory damages to a sum of not more than $ 150,000. In a case where the infringer sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that such infringer was not aware and had no reason to believe that his or her acts constituted an infringement of copyright, the court in its discretion may reduce the award of statutory damages to a sum of not less than $ 200. The court shall remit statutory damages in any case where an infringer believed and had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her use of the copyrighted work was a fair use under section 107 [17 USC 107], if the infringer was: (i) an employee or agent of a nonprofit educational institution, library, or archives acting within the scope of his or her employment who, or such institution, library, or archives itself, which infringed by reproducing the work in copies or phonorecords; or (ii) a public broadcasting entity which or a person who, as a regular part of the nonprofit activities of a public broadcasting entity (as defined in subsection (g) of section 118 [17 USC 118]) infringed by performing a published nondramatic literary work or by reproducing a transmission program embodying a performance of such a work.

(3) (A) In a case of infringement, it shall be a rebuttable presumption that the infringement was committed willfully for purposes of determining relief if the violator, or a person acting in concert with the violator, knowingly provided or knowingly caused to be provided materially false contact information to a domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name registration authority in registering, maintaining, or renewing a domain name used in connection with the infringement.

(B Nothing in this paragraph limits what may be considered willful infringement under this subsection.

(C For purposes of this paragraph, the term "domain name" has the meaning given that term in section 45 of the Act entitled "An Act to provide for the registration and protection of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the provisions of certain international conventions, and for other purposes" approved July 5, 1946 (commonly referred to as the "Trademark Act of 1946"; 15 U.S.C. 1127).

Hi There:

A recent podcast of 'Photoshop User TV' featured a telephone interview with Jack Reznicki about the process, forms and costs involved with registering photos for copyright in the US. One thing I thought was interesting is that when you register your images, a copy is filed with the Library of Congress, and that makes them available for viewing by anyone with access to the 'net. Therefore Jack suggests you do not submit high quality versions of your images. Stealing a copyrighted image from the Library of Congress database makes as much sense as stealing a car from the police station, but the latter at least does happen.

http://www.photoshopusertv.com/?p=268#more-268

Mike.

I don't believe this is the case, the LOC search function only yields the registration information, not the images registered. You cannot view or search the images online at the LOC yet. I tried to see my registered images and all I got was the information about the registration, not the images themselves. The LOC is still working out its online registration capabilities, they are a bit behind the times.....

There are excellent tutorials at www.asmp.org, and www.editorialphoto.com on registration for those interested.

Well that's good to know... I was just going by what Jack Reznicki said in the interview...

Mike.