Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
Thread started 27 Jan 2018 (Saturday) 16:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

...new US Government Copyright Registration rules: how will it affect you?

 
Pinto
Always in our hearts and minds. R.I.P.
Avatar
3,124 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 269
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Idaho
     
Mar 10, 2018 13:02 |  #16

RDKirk wrote in post #18581069 (external link)
That's fine. The benefit is the same.

But they are. This is the way some businesses are doing business--it's how they do their advertising. Why would you think otherwise?

If those photographers are merely accepting a minimal pay-off, that might be true. Or it might not.

Either way, I certainly have less problem with the bounty hunters than with the thieves they're trapping.

+1!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
proimages
Senior Member
Avatar
319 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Woodland Hills, CA
     
Apr 19, 2018 19:12 as a reply to  @ post 18550578 |  #17

I was wondering if adding photos to a video clip as a means of dealing with a large volume of images in each copyright filling?
My typical filling was 50K images 2 twice a year..at 700 images per filling my yearly cost is going from $110
to $3850 a year that's a big jump. like off a cliff... I shoot time lapse and registered both images and video as a Motion Picture/AV Work.

Wondering if anyone in this fine crowd knows if embedding images into video is a viable method to fill a large volume?
Thanks
Cheers
Darrin


Proimages.com (external link) - DarrinNupuf.com (external link) - Nupufnudes.com (external link) - video stock (external link)
_______________
PHOTO - VIDEO - ACTION SPORTS - MOTION CONTROL - TIME LAPSE - BACK COUNTRY - FINE ART

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dan ­ Marchant
Do people actually believe in the Title Fairy?
Avatar
5,054 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1322
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Where I'm from is unimportant, it's where I'm going that counts.
     
Apr 19, 2018 21:57 |  #18

proimages wrote in post #18609938 (external link)
Wondering if anyone in this fine crowd knows if embedding images into video is a viable method to fill a large volume?
Thanks
Cheers
Darrin

I doubt it. You would be registering the video as a single/whole creative work, not the individual images/parts.


Dan Marchant
Website/blog: danmarchant.com (external link)
Instagram: @dan_marchant (external link)
Gear Canon 5DIII + Fuji X-T2 + lenses + a plastic widget I found in the camera box.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
12,809 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 436
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Apr 20, 2018 08:53 |  #19

Dan Marchant wrote in post #18610017 (external link)
I doubt it. You would be registering the video as a single/whole creative work, not the individual images/parts.

For thought, how would that likely affect the effectiveness of the copyright?

Say, a photographer combined 1,000 images into one slideshow.

Each image of the slideshow is, indeed, covered by the copyright of the entire slideshow. For instance, if you pulled a frame from a movie and used it for your own purposes, you can still be sued for copyright infringement.

It might lose a bit of effective coverage from the standpoint that unlike the case with a separate image copyright, an infringement involving only one image is only a small part of the entire copyrighted work, and percentage of the work infringed sometimes makes a difference in a judgment.

OTOH, most infringers will choose to settle when a work has been registered, so the issue may never reach that stage.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dan ­ Marchant
Do people actually believe in the Title Fairy?
Avatar
5,054 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1322
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Where I'm from is unimportant, it's where I'm going that counts.
     
Apr 20, 2018 11:18 |  #20

RDKirk wrote in post #18610208 (external link)
Each image of the slideshow is, indeed, covered by the copyright of the entire slideshow. For instance, if you pulled a frame from a movie and used it for your own purposes, you can still be sued for copyright infringement.

While that is correct I think it would only be correct if you actually pulled the frame from the video. If you were posting them in your portfolio or on photo sharing sites as individual named images I would expect a decent defence lawyer to claim that these were not really part of a video, were primarily used as individual images and should have been registered as such.

Of course that is just my opinion. we would need an IP lawyer (or better yet a judge) to settle the matter.


Dan Marchant
Website/blog: danmarchant.com (external link)
Instagram: @dan_marchant (external link)
Gear Canon 5DIII + Fuji X-T2 + lenses + a plastic widget I found in the camera box.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,477 posts
Gallery: 140 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3114
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Apr 23, 2018 16:40 |  #21

proimages wrote in post #18609938 (external link)
My typical filling was 50K images 2 twice a year.....

.
I am curious about why you felt the need to submit so many images for copyright protection.

Do you really put 100,000 images every year 'out there' where the public can access them? . If so, I would be interested in knowing why.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
proimages
Senior Member
Avatar
319 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Woodland Hills, CA
     
Apr 25, 2018 01:21 as a reply to  @ Tom Reichner's post |  #22

I shoot stock, motion control, time lapse and sports..so both my stills and videos are registered yearly..as unpublished archives.
Then I can later publish online as I want usually in stock sites and social promotions. Never been and issue have 7-8 years done this way.
I've had more work stolen then sold..making sure I have protection for the future.
Cheers D


Proimages.com (external link) - DarrinNupuf.com (external link) - Nupufnudes.com (external link) - video stock (external link)
_______________
PHOTO - VIDEO - ACTION SPORTS - MOTION CONTROL - TIME LAPSE - BACK COUNTRY - FINE ART

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,477 posts
Gallery: 140 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3114
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Apr 25, 2018 10:25 |  #23

proimages wrote in post #18613028 (external link)
I shoot stock, motion control, time lapse and sports..so both my stills and videos are registered yearly..as unpublished archives.
Then I can later publish online as I want usually in stock sites and social promotions. Never been and issue have 7-8 years done this way.
I've had more work stolen then sold..making sure I have protection for the future.
Cheers D

.
So does this mean that you are submitting images for copyright protection that aren't on the internet yet, and that you may not even use in the future? .. Are you just, like, submitting everything you shoot? . . (I just want to know - I don't have an opinion about that one way or the other, but the way I worded the question it may seem like I do have a negative opinion, even though I don't.)


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
proimages
Senior Member
Avatar
319 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Woodland Hills, CA
     
Apr 25, 2018 10:58 as a reply to  @ Tom Reichner's post |  #24

basically yes, a lot of work ends up on web anyway. I try and show BHS and screen shots socially..I'm sitting on a massive library of fine art and stock, starting into editing and releasing more all the time. I can't stop people from stealing my work online, but I will go after companies profiting from my labor. Hope the small claims program is started soon..so hard to get anything of you don't have a filed Copyright. cheers D


Proimages.com (external link) - DarrinNupuf.com (external link) - Nupufnudes.com (external link) - video stock (external link)
_______________
PHOTO - VIDEO - ACTION SPORTS - MOTION CONTROL - TIME LAPSE - BACK COUNTRY - FINE ART

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,477 posts
Gallery: 140 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3114
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Apr 25, 2018 11:49 |  #25

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18613232 (external link)
Are you just, like, submitting everything you shoot?

proimages wrote in post #18613251 (external link)
basically yes . . .

I see.

This is very different from my situation.

I also shoot stock, but the vast majority of the images I shoot aren't "keepers". . I mean, in wildlife and bird photography, it normally takes dozens and dozens of frames before one produces a worthwhile image.

For instance, this past month I shot 1,503 frames, but only 19 are successful images that I will market. . I can't imagine any viable reason for obtaining copyright protection for all of those sub-par images that got culled.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
proimages
Senior Member
Avatar
319 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Woodland Hills, CA
Post edited 6 months ago by proimages.
     
Apr 25, 2018 13:41 as a reply to  @ Tom Reichner's post |  #26

vast majority of my shoots are 1000-2000's frame time lapse projects. Now getting into stop motion..dozen frames per image..also tons of drone lapse frames
adds up quick. I will try and consult an IP attorney and CR office..post back..cheers D


Proimages.com (external link) - DarrinNupuf.com (external link) - Nupufnudes.com (external link) - video stock (external link)
_______________
PHOTO - VIDEO - ACTION SPORTS - MOTION CONTROL - TIME LAPSE - BACK COUNTRY - FINE ART

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
golfecho
(I will regret that)
Avatar
1,708 posts
Likes: 205
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Space Coast, Florida
     
Jul 08, 2018 14:07 |  #27

Bump . . . .

And, has anyone heard about the recent court ruling that established that pictures posted on the internet are in the public domain? I'm sure I'm missing some details, but something doesn't sound right in this court ruling . . .


Facebook (external link) or Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
12,809 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 436
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Jul 08, 2018 17:33 |  #28

golfecho wrote in post #18658647 (external link)
Bump . . . .

And, has anyone heard about the recent court ruling that established that pictures posted on the internet are in the public domain? I'm sure I'm missing some details, but something doesn't sound right in this court ruling . . .

That was a very ignorant plaintiff's attorney facing a very ignorant judge. I wouldn't necessarily expect the judge to be well-read in all the precedents for a certain case angle, but the plaintiff's attorney certainly should have been. The ruling contained issues that I know precedents exist to refute (and I'd expect an IP lawyer to know them by name and off-hand).

I'd expect this to be appealed with plenty of "friend of the court" briefs.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dan ­ Marchant
Do people actually believe in the Title Fairy?
Avatar
5,054 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1322
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Where I'm from is unimportant, it's where I'm going that counts.
     
Jul 09, 2018 00:12 |  #29

golfecho wrote in post #18658647 (external link)
....has anyone heard about the recent court ruling that established that pictures posted on the internet are in the public domain? I'm sure I'm missing some details, but something doesn't sound right in this court ruling . . .

It didn't establish any such thing. Sadly ignorant headline writers have compounded a stupid ruling (that will be overturned) with even more stupid headlines.


Dan Marchant
Website/blog: danmarchant.com (external link)
Instagram: @dan_marchant (external link)
Gear Canon 5DIII + Fuji X-T2 + lenses + a plastic widget I found in the camera box.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ianjohns
Hatchling
Avatar
2 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Aug 2018
     
Aug 29, 2018 11:45 |  #30

This thread has reminded me that I really need to be more diligent with copyrighting my headshot stuff. Shamefully it was something I read about thoroughly (Copyright Zone book, etc.) and never followed through on.


---
Ian Johns Photography (external link) | Headshot Photographer | Boston, Mass.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,145 views & 9 likes for this thread
...new US Government Copyright Registration rules: how will it affect you?
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is dbetts
661 guests, 353 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.