Another Thread, Another Stolen image, by University this time

[greatsave9]

Well my photo has been stolen by my University, in the same yearbook that I'm in it, graduating, with no photo credits at all.

First off, I'm not even a photography student, so I'm in no way in touch or have any affiliation with the yearbook people, I was Computer Science, and I did photography on the side with my SmugMug account as side business. I knew some teams and I went out to their games to do pictures for them as a friend here and there and it worked out great. They paid me for the photos they wanted etc etc...

So I get my yearbook in the mail little bit ago, and to my surprise, their club sport, team photo, that I took is in the yearbook. Yet I never submitted it, neither did any of the players on the team. (Only 2 captains and 2 assistant captains talked to the school cause the University didn't recognize them as a main sport). And they asked the team if anyone submitted photos nobody on the team knew anything and they didnt know they made the yearbook.

So the only other way they got the photo was somehow they went onto my webpage and pulled the image in hopes I'd never find out. Maybe a Google search or something yielded results of my webpage. While the webpage is protected and I have copyrights everywhere, with computers its still possible to pull the image most of the time.

So I do have a cousin who's a lawyer who made this very nice professional draft letter thats pretty mean and to the point. Or I have my lighter student-like version on how I got screwed, I'm not sure which one to go with.

I would like compensation but I don't want to hurt my future chances if I ever go back to my University for anything. Ironic, all 4 years they said, don't plagiarize and never cheat..... all while they steal my stuff and plagiarizes my work. I'm seeking my "commercial license" fee at least hopefully :)

[scot079]

I'd go with a polite, yet to-the-point reply. Save the "mean" for the second letter, which you'll no doubt have to write...just kidding, hope they do the right thing. :-)

[Aaagogo]

since you have a lawyer written and prepared letter, i say go for the lawyer one, with all the letter head and business envelop and everything, that should get a response.

and then CC the latest Gergson Vs Vilana case.

[greatsave9]

Email has been sent and discovered 3 images, in total but with 2 other photos in question, have been copied. So because they're a University, and suppositively run by student, but with a employee/teacher adviser, are my chances of getting a fairly priced commercial right for the use of my Jpeg. Somewhere between $150-250.

On the yearbook webpage, it even says for students to join to meet new friends and "and even make some extra money" so they're paying some apparently...

We shall see what happens. Just sucks, wish I didnt have to go through with it, but they are my photos and they did legitimately steal them

[f50fan]

hope it goes well!

[Curtis N]

Theft, plagiarism and copyright infringement are three separate and distinct concepts, and you best learn the differences before you start arguing.

Seek advice from your lawyer cousin.

[scorpio_e]

Good luck !!!!!

[amfoto1]

Seek advice from your lawyer cousin.

Yes, and stop skipping those English writing classes. :wink:

But, back to your posts...

I'm a photographer, not an attorney, so this is just my understanding of things, not legal advice:

Realistically, find out what was paid for use of other photos in the year book. If it's $0, that's probably all you will be able to get. If the book is produced by a company working on behalf of the University, and it can be shown that they lifted the photos from your website, and that they have paid for the use of other photos and creative work used in the yearbook, you may get up to several hundred $ per, depending upon the going rates.

Of course, unless your copyright is registered on those images, you really aren't in any position to sue. If the copyright hasn't been registered, you're only in a position to ask them to cease and desist (i.e., not use them in future printings of this yearbook or in any other future yearbooks).

If you had registered your copyright prior to publishing them (which in this case occurred when you posted them on your website, i.e. when they were placed into the public domain), you would be in position to sue for compensation beyond actual damages, which I think is now up to something like $100,000+ per incident.

You might want to check with the US Copyright office for additional info, if you're interested.

[ChrisRabior]

I was under the impression that you had 3 months from the time of publication to register an image and still be able to sue for statutory damages.. as something of a small buffer for people who need to shoot and have the product delivered yesterday before they get the chance to file their registration.

Someone, PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong..

[sfaust]

Yes, there is a 90 day window. If you file you images every 89 days, you would be covered (with few exceptions).

If the going rate is $10, I wouldn't settle for anything less than a substantial increase. Think how different things would be if you got caught shoplifting, all you had to do was pay the going rate. I'd probably start shoplifting tomorrow, and I would guarantee I'd be better off financially! Why give them an incentive to steal from us :) 10X the going rate, or more, or let them hire up a lawyer to defend their actions.

But I would try to work it out the best you can without involving a lawyer. Who wants to start paying $400 an hour to recover a $10 fee? But I wouldn't let them off by only paying the going rate either. Find a middle ground you are comfortable with and work toward that.

Another angle you might want to use is negative publicity. Imagine, a university getting caught cheating off another persons test :)

[Roy Webber]

Good luck! I have had images from my website stolen from competitors selling the same developments..untill we put on the watermark.

[greatsave9]

"Yes, and stop skipping those English writing classes. "
HAHA, thanks guys for all the help and I know, I wrote this quickly at work pretty pissed off.

[greatsave9]

BUMP thread update.
I let it go the first time as I talked to the chief editor.... but now rolls out the 2008 Yearbook, and BAM, ANOTHER image of mine is in there stolen from my webpage! WTF.

Originally the chief editor had the balls to tell me, he doesn't think they're my photos, that they have photos that are nearly identical. Yet when I overlay my photos on top of the black and white of the yearbook, they magically become perfect color images. That and I have the players in the photos, saying that I was there at their game, taking the photos LOL. Some people! Go figure.

[Box Brownie]

BUMP thread update.
I let it go the first time as I talked to the chief editor.... but now rolls out the 2008 Yearbook, and BAM, ANOTHER image of mine is in there stolen from my webpage! WTF.

Originally the chief editor had the balls to tell me, he doesn't think they're my photos, that they have photos that are nearly identical. Yet when I overlay my photos on top of the black and white of the yearbook, they magically become perfect color images. That and I have the players in the photos, saying that I was there at their game, taking the photos LOL. Some people! Go figure.

Just a thought without the legal understanding ~ you have 'proof' to show that the images are yours, therefore surely the onus is on "them" to show beyond doubt that they obtained the images legally. It is just possible that a.n.other person grabbed the images and passed them off as their own..........but where that will take you I have no idea???

Best of luck getting your rewards and the offending party their just deserts :lol:

[breal101]

It's unbelievable this guy is trying to blow you off which such a lame excuse. As Bugs Bunny would say, this means war! I think Stephen's idea of going to the press is an excellent idea.
University cheats and lies seems like a good story to me.

[ibdb]

Is the editor a student? You might also be able to gain some traction if your school has some sort of honor court. I know that copyright infringement is not equal to plagiarism, but I'd be willing to guess that in a university honor court, you'd still be in a great position to win. It might be a cheap way in and a stepping stone towards an equitable resolution.

[sfaust]

Another option is to spend $250 with a lawyer to write them a cease and desist letter. That will get their attention knowing they will have to start proving they are right (hard to do if they know for a fact they are wrong). But it gets them serious about talking with you.

Then you can give them an offer.... $xxx for usage + $250 to cover your lawyers fee, or remove the images (re-print the yearbook!). Your risk is that you could loose the $250 fee if you decide not to pursue it further, but chances are if they know they are wrong, they aren't going to throw good money at a situation they are bound to loose.

This tends to cut through all the BS, and let them know if they want to convince someone they are right, the can start with the lawyers and courts not you. Most tend to figure out they can't BS the lawyers, and tend to start listening more than talking, and they will start looking for a way out. $xxx + $250 starts to look better the longer they think about it.

[710 Studio]

Of course, unless your copyright is registered on those images, you really aren't in any position to sue. If the copyright hasn't been registered, you're only in a position to ask them to cease and desist (i.e., not use them in future printings of this yearbook or in any other future yearbooks).


Incorrect. The images do NOT have to be registered to be covered by copyright laws. The United States legal system considers any intellectual property to be covered by copyright immediately after being stored on some sort of media - even if that media is computer disk. If you have proof that this is your image, then you are covered by US copyright law. No registration required.

For more information, check out:
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html (http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html)

Best of luck to you!

-------EDIT-------

Chapter ONE of the US Copyright Law states the following:

§ 102. Subject matter of copyright: In general28
( a ) Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Works of authorship include the following categories:

( 1 ) literary works;

( 2 ) musical works, including any accompanying words;

( 3 ) dramatic works, including any accompanying music;

( 4 ) pantomimes and choreographic works;

( 5 ) pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works;

( 6 ) motion pictures and other audiovisual works;

( 7 ) sound recordings; and

( 8 ) architectural works.


That shows that you are protected by copyright laws as soon as you take the picture - no registration required.

[themichael]

Registration gives you two advantages: 1. Being able go to court and 2. Collecting damages and legal fees.

See:
http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2008/archives/1665
and
http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2008/archives/1651

[basroil]

Registration gives you two advantages: 1. Being able go to court and 2. Collecting damages and legal fees.

See:
http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2008/archives/1665
and
http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2008/archives/1651

Do keep these two VERY important things in mind. A 35 buck filing fee is well worth it if they are repeat offenders.

Another suggestion is to take it up with everyone, send letters (not just emails, but physical letters) to the club adviser and everyone up that chain to the highest level. Only caution is that they may revoke your ability to photograph events in the future if it is a private university.

And also send letters to the yearbook editors parents stating their child has a balance of XXXX dollars due at the end of the month. If that doesn't get them in line, I don't know what will.

[jaypie77]

Wow! There are a lot of people piling on in here and telling you to take pretty rash action, but if I were you I'd think long and hard about how much $100-$200 is really worth to you and what it could really cost you.

First, you're making some pretty big allegations that somebody from the yearbook outright stole your images from your website. Proof?

I worked for a university yearbook myself a while back and I tell you what - nobody had the time or effort to go around googling images and then stealing them. If we needed an image, we either sent somebody out to shoot it or we contacted the club and somebody emailed a copy to us. My guess is that that's what happened here and whoever did it forgot about it.

The next thing to think about is that this image is a group photo. Do you really think a university yearbook has a budget to spend any money on these things? Of course not. They would never pay for something like this - we never did because these photos were always given to us for free or taken by staff.

As for a credit, no huge surprise that you didn't get one. I personally shot 60%+ of my yearbook (on a staff of 8 photographers, no less) and probably 10% were credited incorrectly. That's what happens when careless college students run the show - mistakes are made and nobody cares.

And the last, and perhaps most important thing: reputation. You're going to come off as an out-of-his league amateur arrogantly and foolishly demanding much more than you're worth. The University is going to laugh at this, if it notices at all, and anybody directly involved with this will probably think you're a fool and that's how rumors begin. Aside from that, even with punitive damages (which I would not count on) the amount of time and effort the legal process will take is going to be more than any amount of money you might get by that avenue.

On top of that, your lawyer cousin probably isn't going to be worth much to you beyond his initial letter - no self-respecting lawyer is going to stick his neck out over a hundred bucks - he has his own reputation to worry about after all, and the legal world is much smaller than most people realize.

On the whole, I think you're in a situation where youthful indiscretion and poor advice from strangers can lead you into a situation you don't really want and to burn bridges you don't want to burn. At most, I'd consider sending a polite and friendly letter explaining the situation and asking for reasonable compensation. Perhaps that might lead to further opportunities. Perhaps not. Either way, declaring war on the University would be extremely foolish in the long-term, and if you actually make a career out of photography, this $100 group photo will be a distant memory very soon.

Is a club group photo worth that much to you?

[sfaust]

Incorrect. The images do NOT have to be registered to be covered by copyright laws. The United States legal system considers any intellectual property to be covered by copyright immediately after being stored on some sort of media - even if that media is computer disk. If you have proof that this is your image, then you are covered by US copyright law. No registration required.

You don't need to register your images, but if you don't you can't file a copyright lawsuit if infringed! So yea, you need to register your images in order to receive full protection under the copyright laws. The law allows for immediate registration and minimal protection as a way to protect the artist between the time of creation and the registration. Its not meant as an alternative to registering.

[sfaust]

First, you're making some pretty big allegations that somebody from the yearbook outright stole your images from your website. Proof?....

I tend to agree with you, but....

Proof is pretty easy. He has his original image that when overlaid over theirs is perfectly registered. Since it is his, then he probably has a series of images before ad after that image, the EXIF data of those images will show his camera, serial number, time taken, and a sequential number. He has proofs from the players themselves that he was there taking images. It's unlikely the University would have the same level of proof.

He had also talked with then in the past about the same issue with regard to another image. But they obviously ignored that and went ahead and published yet another of his images without permission. At what point do you decided to do something. The second time, third, fourth, ... ??

I do agree with you that its not worth taking legal action. The price to be paid for the win
isn't worth the effort. The damages are negligible, and punitive probably isn't there either. However, its worth some time and effort to right a wrong, especially in light of how he was treated.

A cease and desist letter is cheap to have drafted, and probably easy to recover the costs in the negotiations that are sure to follow. It should list the allegation, the proof he has the image is his own, that he has contacted the editor in chief in the past regarding this, and ask them to stop using the image immediately. If it is truly his image, which we have no reason to believe he is lying to us, the University will have a hard time proving its theirs.

The cease and desist or a well written letter from an attorney will do a few things for the OP that he has been unable to do. Get the Universities attention rather than having the editor in chief belittle him and tell him to go away. It will cause the editor in chief to answer this to his peers, superiors, and the legal department, all of which won't be as easy to dismiss. He will have to convince the legal department that that its their image so they know how to proceed. It will let them know the OP is serious, and has the copyright law on his side. It will leave them with the impression that he may be willing to take the next step in the legal process. All this will get them to carefully consider their options regarding their legal standing, publicity ramifications, etc.

If its his image, he will now be in a much better position to be heard, and resolve the issue. He may just ask for the legal fee he paid to be reimbursed, let the two incidences slide, and have them agree not to let it happen again. It would cost the University less to do this, than it would to have a lawyer answer the cease and desist letter.

I highly doubt this would hurt his reputation outside the University. In fact, probably not hurt it within the University other than the very small handful of people involved. All he is asking is that the University respect his legal rights, something the University routinely asks others to do for itself. If the OP isn't asking for anything other than for the University not to break the law, it would be hard for them to hold him to ridicule in the publics eye. In fact it would probably back fire on them if they tried.

But when all is said and done, is it worth the effort and the possible loss of a couple hundred dollars. In most cases I would say no. But seeing how this was their second time, and the editor in chief has a '*(#$ you attitude, absolutely. This won't go to court, it won't make the OP any money. It won't hurt future opportunities since there are none with a client that will steal the images and then belittle the photographer. But it could set the situation straight at the expense of the University, and thats worth pursuing IMO.

[amfoto1]

...think long and hard about how much $100-$200 is really worth to you and what it could really cost you....


Once the images are registered, the punitive damages can go over $100,000 per incidence, plus reimbursement of all legal expenses. If they willfully removed a copyright mark, such as cropping off a watermark, tack on an extra $30,000 per incidence.

Yes, it's worth it.

[jaypie77]

Once the images are registered, the punitive damages can go over $100,000 per incidence, plus reimbursement of all legal expenses. If they willfully removed a copyright mark, such as cropping off a watermark, tack on an extra $30,000 per incidence.

Yes, it's worth it.

If you really think that anything remotely close to $100,000 is possible through punitive damages, you probably also believe that "you may already be a winner of the $10 billion dollar grand prize" with Publisher's Clearinghouse.

[mattograph]

There are a lot of excellent posts here, but this really is simple.

If you feel like you have a claim, review it with your attorney.

If he agrees, find out how much it's gonna cost you to pursue it.

If its worth it, employee him to do so. From that point on, do what he tells you to do, which most likely will be to shut up and let him handle it.

Then you win or lose.

Then you move on, wiser for the future.

[holrd]

well if you think they are stealing images from your site then stick a big watermark on the images. Then if they try and do it again they will have a watermark to deal with.

[Kimberwhip]

I think holrd has the winning answer.

[ryant35]

I think holrd has the winning answer.

That doesn't stop some people. I have some of my images on the corporate sponsor websites of some racers with the watermarks. These 2 companies are large national corporations. One of them even used my watermarked image on a flier distributed on windshields during the race.

[basroil]

That doesn't stop some people. I have some of my images on the corporate sponsor websites of some racers with the watermarks. These 2 companies are large national corporations. One of them even used my watermarked image on a flier distributed on windshields during the race.

I hope you sued them for quite a lot, considering your logo was on it they can't argue it's fair use or a common stock type image.

[sfaust]

That doesn't stop some people. I have some of my images on the corporate sponsor ...

As long as photographers do nothing about it, there is no incentive for them not to use the images!

If it was one of my images, at minimum they would get a letter drafted from an attorney with a cease and desist demand, and use that to open up negotiations on reimbursement. It lets them know you understand the law, reminds them of the awkward position they are in, and that you have an attorney working on your behalf. It tends to cut through the BS rather quickly, so reasonable negotiations can start.

You don't have to file a lawsuit to get their attention, but sending an e-mail or personal letter doesn't seem to carry as much weight as one with an attorneys letterhead on it ;)