User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Copyright vs. Copyright License..?

  1. #1
    Member Grumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Apr 2011
    Location
    Lugarno, Sydney
    Posts
    134
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Copyright vs. Copyright License..?

    I have always included a copyright notice in the exif data on every photo I process for the net, and though I don't use it (I'm a flickr man myself), apparently that copyright shows up when pictures are posted on facebook.

    So today, I got challenged about my right to use a Copyright symbol :-o after a friend posted some of my pictures on their facebook page. I was told that apparently, I need to purchase a Copyright License and have a license number before I can copyright my pictures (or perhaps just before I can use the Copyright symbol...)?

    Now, I always understood that the photographer automatically has copyright of their own photos... is it just that I'm not allowed to use the Copyright symbol to advertise the fact? Or is a Copyright License for different purposes - such as commercial use of your photos (something I aspire to, but is probably a long way off).

    Can anyone tell me if I'm really doing something wrong here?
    Cheers
    Grum.

  2. #2
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Grum, copyright ( in Australia at least ) is automatically awarded to the photographer unless other contractual arrangements are in place.
    The copyright symbol attached to your image is purely an indication that you think you are hope to be seen as are the original owner of the works.

    flikr is the FIRST place that people are going to steal borrow your photos from.

    facebook is the second.

    If you post photos to the net expect to have them stolen borrowed.

    Photoshop is a marvellous program, it allows people who are skilled in its use to remove annoying watermarks / copyright symbols in their work.

    Have you taken any photos that are worth stealing borrowing and posted them on the net?
    Last edited by I @ M; 08-05-2011 at 6:18pm.
    Andrew
    Nikon, Fuji, Nikkor, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and too many other bits and pieces to list.



  3. #3
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,640
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    my understanding is that in the USA you may need to buy a licence to protect your photography, this does not apply to Australia. So your friend, is frankly full of it. No one owns the copyright symbol, and you are free to use it.

    "What Is Not Protected by Copyright?
    Several categories of material are generally not eligible for copyright protection. These include among others:

    Works that have not been fixed in a tangible form of expression (for example, choreographic works that have not been notated or recorded, or improvisational speeches or performances that have not been written or recorded). Titles, names, short phrases, and slogans; familiar symbols or designs; mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring; mere listings of ingredients or contents. Ideas, procedures, methods, systems, processes, concepts, principles, discoveries, or devices, as distinguished from a description, explanation, or illustration. Works consisting entirely of information that is common property and containing no original authorship (for example: standard calendars, height and weight charts, tape measures and rulers, and lists or tables taken from public documents or other common sources)"
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  4. #4
    Member
    Threadstarter
    Grumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Apr 2011
    Location
    Lugarno, Sydney
    Posts
    134
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Andrew - I would consider it an honour if anyone thought any of my pictures were worth 'borrowing'. Having said that, I do watermark them (I know - watermarks can be disguised or removed), and always resize them to just 1024px before posting - so maybe people can use them elsewhere on the net, but not make prints from them.

    But in this instance, it was the fact that somebody challenged my right to even put the copyright on my pictures that has upset me...
    Cheers
    G

  5. #5
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,640
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumby View Post
    Andrew - I would consider it an honour if anyone thought any of my pictures were worth 'borrowing'. Having said that, I do watermark them (I know - watermarks can be disguised or removed), and always resize them to just 1024px before posting - so maybe people can use them elsewhere on the net, but not make prints from them.

    But in this instance, it was the fact that somebody challenged my right to even put the copyright on my pictures that has upset me...
    Cheers
    G
    Can you block people on Flickr, if you can, I would!

  6. #6
    It's all about the Light!
    Tech Admin
    Kym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Jun 2008
    Location
    Modbury, Adelaide
    Posts
    9,641
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Copyright is assigned by default according to the Bern convention to which we and the US are signatories.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyrig...ning_copyright

    In all countries that are members of the Berne Convention, copyright is automatic and need not be obtained through official registration with any government office. Once an idea has been reduced to tangible form, for example by securing it in a fixed medium (such as a drawing, sheet music, photograph, a videotape, or a computer file), the copyright holder, or rightsholder, is entitled to enforce his or her exclusive rights. However, while registration isn't needed to exercise copyright, in jurisdictions where the laws provide for registration, it serves as prima facie evidence of a valid copyright.
    regards, Kym Gallery Honest & Direct Constructive Critique Appreciated! ©
    Digital & film, Bits of glass covering 10mm to 500mm, and other stuff



  7. #7
    Member
    Threadstarter
    Grumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Apr 2011
    Location
    Lugarno, Sydney
    Posts
    134
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    LOL Rick - thanks for your input. The person that challenged me actually saw me face-to-face (I sometimes wish I could block that too...)
    Kym - That's just about what I understood. But since this challenge came from an established photographer with a business of their own - I wondered if a Copyright 'License' was something different from Copyright - but it sounds like it is just a means of 'registering' the fact you have Copyright rather relying on the fact that you took the photo in the first place...

    Maybe she was just trying to wind me up (she succeeded...)
    Cheers
    G

  8. #8
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,640
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Sounds to me like this photographer with a business of their own, needs to learn about the copyright...hehe. Maybe suggest they sign up here and they will be given a lesson

  9. #9
    can't remember Tannin's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Apr 2007
    Location
    Ballarat
    Posts
    2,894
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumby View Post
    Can anyone tell me if I'm really doing something wrong here?
    You certainly are. You are listening to a clueless man.

    There was something in a rules a bit like that, years ago - I mean many years, like 40 or 50 years. I can't remember the details now. Doesn't matter anyway, it as Rick and I&M have stated. By creating the work, you own the copyright.
    Tony

    People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.

  10. #10
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    29 Dec 2007
    Location
    Mansfield, Victoria
    Posts
    856
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The US has a system of registering copyright, but the main value is in regard to damages claimable (and then only if you are suing n the US I'd guess).

    Edit: Registration is not necessary in the US to retain your rights - laws there were changed some time back.
    Last edited by farmer_rob; 08-05-2011 at 10:57pm. Reason: Extra info
    Regards, Rob

    D600, AF-S 35mm f1.8G DX, AF-S 50mm f1.8G, AF-S 24-85mm f3.5-4.5G ED VR, AF-S 70-300mm F4.5-5.6G VR, Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM
    Photos: geeoverbar.smugmug.com Software: CS6, Lightroom 4

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •