{"id":249,"date":"2010-01-30T19:09:27","date_gmt":"2010-01-31T00:09:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/?p=249"},"modified":"2010-01-30T19:12:08","modified_gmt":"2010-01-31T00:12:08","slug":"take-my-intellectual-property-please","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/?p=249","title":{"rendered":"Take My Intellectual Property, Please."},"content":{"rendered":"

The aptly named new on-line magazine, “Pilfered<\/em><\/strong>” recently came to the attention of Photo District News.<\/strong> By all means, read the fine\u00a0PDN piece at : http:\/\/tinyurl.com\/yar9vgj<\/a><\/p>\n

Well we were flat out shocked by the apparent use of a business model which seems to foster, encourage and\/or facilitate the unabashed “pilfering” of the creative work of others.\u00a0 We guessed the magazine must be headquartered somewhere like Casablanca.\u00a0 The sheer audacity of the venture is however, rather stunning.<\/p>\n

“Pilfer” is a simple, non-legal word which carries with it simple definition(s): To steal (a small amount or item). See Synonyms- \u00a0steal;<\/em><\/strong> verb: To steal or filch<\/em>.\u00a0 The operative word being “steal<\/strong>“.<\/p>\n

We will do a follow up piece very shortly dealing with legal issues including: “facilitation of copyright infringement”, “willful blindness”, statutory damages, discretionary court awards, dealing with multiple infringers and other aspects of “pilfering” which come to mind. For now we note the following:<\/p>\n

1<\/strong>.\u00a0 According to the PDN article, members of the photo community, possibly photographers themselves are collaborating in this celebration of theft.\u00a0 While we are long passed being “shocked” by such things, we are very disappointed.\u00a0 If photographers are in fact participating in this venture they may be subjecting themselves to lawsuits brought by (especially) registered copyright holders of ‘pilfered images’.\u00a0 That ventures such as these directly and adversely affect creatives’ wallets is beyond dispute.<\/p>\n

2.<\/strong> At first blush the business model and so-called limitations of liability appear shall we say, suspect. One essential right belonging to a copyright holder is the right to deny the use of his\/her image to anyone for virtually any reason under almost any circumstance. (The issue of Fair Use<\/em> is for another day)<\/p>\n

3.<\/strong> Check the site thoroughly and look for any of your images.\u00a0 If you find one or more of them posted without consent or license from you, run do not walk to your attorney’s office.\u00a0 See and talk to competent counsel before doing anything.\u00a0 Do not rely on the advice or opinion of any photographer, rep, agent or blogger.\u00a0 Do not hysterically or even calmly, call or write to anyone except an attorney.<\/em> You and your attorney will determine whether or not you have a valid claim and if so, for what.\u00a0 Those of you who have a valid claim and especially those whose images are already registered, will be eternally thankful for having sent $35 to the Federal Government.<\/p>\n

Those of you who have read our articles or posts over the last decade and especially those of you have seen us lecture, know that we have been warning photographers of their suicidal (professionally speaking) behavior.\u00a0 The phrase “Talking till we’re Blue in the Face” was born of our frustration with the failure of creatives to employ routine business practices including but hardly limited to, registering all images, all of the time, without exception and without excuses.<\/p>\n

The web has gifted to anyone who owns a computer the ability to steal, scan, appropriate and\/or infringe upon the creative works of others including yours.\u00a0 We can all agree that even a semi-computer literate 6 year old now possesses both the skills and equipment needed to steal your work.\u00a0 This is but one big reason why we spend so much time trying to convince our readers and lecture attendees to register their work.\u00a0 It remains a mystery (to at least Ed) as to why we have to put so much effort into persuading creatives to do that which is easy, cheap and essential to their very economic existence. (Remember also that violations of Copyright afford creatives the opportunity to recover money damages, attorneys fee and other good things)<\/p>\n

Countless excuses (none valid) have been given to us over the years as to why infringements should not be aggressively pursued by photographers and illustrators.\u00a0 All sorts of touchy-feely and\/or tortured reasoning are employed by the generally passive creative community to justify inaction (see also “victimization”).\u00a0 Such views are well known to copyright thieves, especially the repeat offenders.\u00a0 They make a very simple cost benefit analysis – it “pays to steal”.\u00a0 The odds of being pursued by photographers and forced to pay “real money” via the Courts or otherwise, are so long as to make the crime pay.\u00a0 If the above paragraphs sound familiar to you, good – they should.\u00a0 The above equation has been in full force and effect since Al Gore invented the net.<\/p>\n

We welcome any opposing views or justifications for this venture whether coming from its participants or otherwise.\u00a0 If we have misapprehended or misunderstood the business model and basic structure of “Pilfered’ any of its officers, principals, directors are welcome to set us straight in this space and\/or in a public forum.<\/p>\n

The title of this piece, by the way, refers to Jack’s feeling, since he registers all<\/strong> of his images. The several times he has been infringed have all resulted in large settlements.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The aptly named new on-line magazine, “Pilfered” recently came to the attention of Photo District News. By all means, read the fine\u00a0PDN piece at : http:\/\/tinyurl.com\/yar9vgj Well we were flat out shocked by the apparent use of a business model which seems to foster, encourage and\/or facilitate the unabashed “pilfering” of the creative work of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-249","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-copyright-info"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=249"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":253,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249\/revisions\/253"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=249"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=249"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=249"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}