Copyrighting, is it an essential thing to do, or do you just add the © symbol?

[Scubysnaps 9]

Hi folks,

I've seen some quite interesting scenarios on this forum!

So I thought I'd best start off on the right foot and check this out with you guys, if thats ok

 

Although its not a great cost of just £67 a year, does everyone elways upload their photos to http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/ before they watermark them and publish them?

Could you not just keep a copy of them on a sealed & I'm sure the datestamped CD with all the relevant metadata, what is the advantage? I'm sure the © site have a huge dtatabase of superb photos, couldnt they be a place where we could advertise them too?

 

In a similar vein, what is the process of getting a person's permission to include them in one of your proposed publishable images? Do you simply just ask them to sign a form or something!?

 

Many thanks

Woody

[TheRealDrew 0]

Hi folks,

I've seen some quite interesting scenarios on this forum!

So I thought I'd best start off on the right foot and check this out with you guys, if thats ok

 

Although its not a great cost of just £67 a year, does everyone elways upload their photos to http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/ before they watermark them and publish them?

Could you not just keep a copy of them on a sealed & I'm sure the datestamped CD with all the relevant metadata, what is the advantage? I'm sure the © site have a huge dtatabase of superb photos, couldnt they be a place where we could advertise them too?

 

In a similar vein, what is the process of getting a person's permission to include them in one of your proposed publishable images? Do you simply just ask them to sign a form or something!?

 

Many thanks

Woody

 

Not sure on the ins and outs of the UK copyright and a quick look here and here indicates generally the same things as US, but in VERY broad stroke - copyright exists in the US automatically at the time of fixation, filing in the copyright office and adding the symbol helps with the amount of damages and provides some proof....the self mailing is a form of proof to some degree. Not sure if you can register directly in the UK or need the third party service?

 

Filing Photos In The US

 

Page 7 of the PDF in the Copyright Basics Form Upper Left outlines some of the advantages.

 

As to person's permissions I am assuming you mean a model release? That is usually the course of action for CYA in general....

[Scubysnaps 9]

Thanks Drew,

 

Yes I saw the first link you put up, the 2nd one is one I was really expecting, which is a government site but it doesn't seem to be the right type of service for multiple photos. As the other one isn't a government site it is raising a bit of doubt with myself so am unsure. Yes I assume some type of model release is the info I was looking for I think?

 

 

Not sure on the ins and outs of the UK copyright and a quick look here and here indicates generally the same things as US, but in VERY broad stroke - copyright exists in the US automatically at the time of fixation, filing in the copyright office and adding the symbol helps with the amount of damages and provides some proof....the self mailing is a form of proof to some degree. Not sure if you can register directly in the UK or need the third party service?

 

Filing Photos In The US

 

Page 7 of the PDF in the Copyright Basics Form Upper Left outlines some of the advantages.

 

As to person's permissions I am assuming you mean a model release? That is usually the course of action for CYA in general....

[PeterCatchpole 0]

in Britain we don't need to register our work, can i suggest you look at the Association of Photographers website, it has a great deal of useful information about copyright, contracts etc in addition their book Beyong the Lens is very worthwhile buying.

 

it will take you through all the questions that you have.

 

Peter

[Scubysnaps 9]

Thanks very much for the pointer Peter

 

 

...ORDERED

Edited December 12, 2009 by Scubysnaps

[PeterCatchpole 0]

you won't be dissapointed, come back if you have any queries. I have found it very helpful and paid for itself many times.

[decosnapper 37]

Although its not a great cost of just £67 a year, does everyone elways upload their photos to http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/ before they watermark them and publish them?

Could you not just keep a copy of them on a sealed & I'm sure the datestamped CD with all the relevant metadata, what is the advantage? I'm sure the © site have a huge dtatabase of superb photos, couldnt they be a place where we could advertise them too?

 

In a similar vein, what is the process of getting a person's permission to include them in one of your proposed publishable images? Do you simply just ask them to sign a form or something!?

 

Two issues; copyright and model releases.

 

Copyright; as per the other posters, buying the AOP book Beyond the Lens is better use of your cash than paying for a registration service here in the UK. If infringed, you would have more than enough proof to prove you were the photographer; RAW files, similar images taken at the same time, metadata embedded in the image, receipts and proof of going to where you took the image etc etc etc. This would be enough to compel an infringer to settle before going to court.

 

This may change if the Orphan Works section of the Digital Economy Bill finds its way through parliament - but there are many fighting that tooth and nail. Orphan works are images where the creator cannot be easily identified. The Conservative MP for Culture Media and Sport (Jeremy Hunt) actually suggested an "opt-out" of orphan works....but as metadata can be removed and © notices in the image be cropped, anyone can create an orphan then there is no safeguard. How could anyone know I own an image....and if I have "opted out"? Its a paradox I cannot figure.

 

In light of Orphan Works, now more than ever has the need to be identified as the creator of an image been important - particularly online. Anything you post must have copyright and contact details embedded AND a "© Your first name and last name. All rights reserved" displayed. Do not use nicknames, company names, or website addresses behind the © as this could infer that someone else may own the image rights. Just like a car door lock, it won't stop thieves, but it slows them down or makes them go elsewhere.

 

Model releases; UK specific advice follows. For editorial use (newspapers and magazines) then no model release is required. For advertising then they are a very good idea indeed. People can object to their face endorsing a product. Actually recovering damages is difficult unless your "image" has proven value and you can prove loss. For example, my face (great for radio) has no value, but a professional model could prove the value of their image and thereby demonstrate loss. At least that is my understanding.

 

Hope this helps.

[Scubysnaps 9]

Thanks Peter, will do

[Scubysnaps 9]

Thanks Simon

[PeterCatchpole 0]

Simon has written a couple, that I'm aware of, articles on copyright, the free Underwater photography magazine and presented at the BSoUP sessions. Have a look at these sites for more of his excellent info.

Peter

[decosnapper 37]

Simon has written a couple, that I'm aware of, articles on copyright, the free Underwater photography magazine and presented at the BSoUP sessions. Have a look at these sites for more of his excellent info.

Peter

 

Thanks Peter - Two pieces are available to download:-

 

UWP Mag number 51 has a piece about copyright

BSOUP has a PDF for download here - Copyright PDF

 

There is another piece I did for BSOUP all about how to recover damages from an infringer (thief) but this is not generally available. If anyone has a specific need to recover damages as a result of copyright infringement then please PM me. In short, its a simple 6-step process that is pretty straightforward in most cases. The simple rule I apply to web infringement is NEVER let the thief "Just take it down and consider the matter closed". The only language most commercial organizations understand is money and "by taking it down" the serious nature of copyright theft is missed. Without understanding the value of a photographers' work (amateur and pro alike - no distinction here) then the infringer will probably scour the web for an alternative and lift that one. Hard cash reminds them of the value. And means I can continue what I do and enjoy.

Edited December 12, 2009 by decosnapper