Luckily, you are one of many creators today who have to work to protect their work against potential copyright infringement, be it accidental, or very much deliberate.  

We’ve boiled down the essential steps of what to do if the worst happens and you realise that, for whatever reason, your work has been stolen. 

1. Evaluate

It’s a hard pill to swallow, but it is worthwhile to step back and objectively evaluate what exactly has occurred, and what the best and worst case outcome scenarios look like. Before you engage the party that did the infringing, figure out their goals for using your content. For instance, are they using it for personal or commercial use? Based on that, decide for yourself whether you want to ask for a certain amount of money in recompense or whether it’s worthwhile pursuing legal action… or both, or neither, or something in between. 

2. Document

Screenshots and any other documentation you can collect are your best friends at times like these. A high-resolution image (with the URL included) can speak a thousand words and solidify your case against the guilty party. Include a time-stamp, if possible. In other words, anything that will amount to concrete, irrefutable proof of infringement. Moreover, continue documenting any and all communications pertaining to the infringement, whether they are with the infringer or even your own lawyer. You want a paper trail. 

3. Notify

One follow-up possibility (although it probably won’t garner you any money) is sending a takedown notice to the host or whoever manages the websites. In many countries, a takedown notice alone requires the party that has infringed on the copyright to take down the item in question, or at the very least to take some sort of action.

4. Advocate

Copyright laws are complicated on a good day, more so when infringement occurs. Laws also vary from country to country. If you have any doubts at all as to how to proceed (and you most likely will!) or even just have questions in general, now would be a great time to reach out for professional guidance. Luckily, there are many copyright protection and monitoring services, (CopyrightsWorld is one), not to mention organisations and lawyers, that are there to help you reach the right conclusions and not over or under-react. At the end of the day, many creators tend to undervalue their work, yet engaging in a lengthy legal battle can have disastrous consequences for you. This is precisely why constant professional monitoring of infringement can be a life-saver. Automating and digitizing this process, as CopyrightsWorld has done, makes it much easier to avoid copyright infringement.

5. Contact

Now comes the trickiest part… making contact with the party you think is stealing your work. Let’s be honest – there are very, very few scenarios in which personal contact with the infringer can go smoothly. Of course, resolving matters peacefully and fairly is never off the table, but there are too many cases of the exact opposite occurring for us to recommend reaching out to the other party yourself. 

Not reaching out in person is not the extent of how far you have to remove yourself from the situation, however. You must absolutely 100% refrain from posting anything whatsoever about potential infringement activity on any public medium such as social media. 

If you decide to contact the other party after all, make sure you have a clear purpose in your communications that makes it obvious what you want from the other individual: is it money? Licensing? Recognition? If it is money, attach an invoice from other work you have licensed showing approximate costs. However, if you’re unsure about the exact commercial value of your work, don’t “guesstimate”. This will make it difficult later to seek an accurate amount for your work. Avoid the topic of pricing at all until you can ask for a specific number. 

Although the famous Oscar Wilde quote “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery” is true in some instances, creators like yourself can have their livelihoods destroyed by unauthorized copyright infringement. When your uniqueness is the backbone of your earnings, there is nothing more important than protecting your individuality. At CopyrightsWorld, we get it, and we’re here to be your copyrights watchdog.

Copyright infringement of digital photos differs in important ways from infringement in the markets of  music and movies. 

Opportunities for photo infringement are numerous as an infringer need not actively log into a peer-to-peer file-sharing network to infringe; one need only right-click an image found via an online search. 

It is very interesting that some infringers are unaware of the fact that they are breaching someone’s rights, or that they have any legal obligation to pay for the use of a photo. Even if they do know that they have to pay, they don’t know how much and to whom. The second fact is that infringers are typically unaware of an image’s price at the time of infringement.

While some might advocate that it’s impossible to completely prevent digital photo infringement, there are ways to protect your photos and prevent or revert their unauthorised use. 

We have picked the top five most effective things you can do to retain full control of your work – and make sure you get fairly paid.

1. Get proof of ownership by registering your copyright

When you create an original work, you are automatically granted copyright of that work, which means you can decide how it is used and distributed. 

Even though it is not mandatory, copyright registration provides valuable legal protection. It makes it easier for other people to find your protected material, and also helps you  assert your legal rights by providing date stamped evidence of the exact or approximate creation date. It can help you mitigate the risk of expensive and timely litigation, whether you are a claimant or a defendant, as you have proof of ownership. Registration is essential if you ever find yourself filing or defending an infringement lawsuit and recommended for businesses and individuals alike, who wish to protect the inherent value of their work.

Read more about the importance of copyright registration explained by General corporate lawyer Harender Branch, from UK law firm Branch Austin.

2. Use a copyright notice

Displaying a copyright notice, such as ‘© All Rights Reserved,’ has not been a legal requirement in the US since 1989. It does, however, clearly identify you as the copyright holder, thereby decreasing the likelihood it will be used without authorization and bolstering legal evidence in the case that it is.

If your photo is used online without your consent, you can assume that the user knew that the photo was copyrighted. This is a very good example of how a copyright notice can help as evidence of ownership in case of legal dispute.

3. Watermark your work

A watermark is a very prominent way of protecting your work and showing evidence of copyright ownership but unfortunately not one you can fully trust. Watermarks can be removed with a series of photo editing software and apps. 

The best method to apply watermarks is that of randomised digital watermarking. This method is based on constantly changing the watermarks’ shape and design before being applied on your photo. While it is effective it enhances an already existing challenge with watermarks which is the final design. With randomised digital watermarking, you can’t have any control over the final result and its effects on your photo. 

4. Digital sign all your photos

A very good way to have a proof of ownership is by digitally signing all of your photos. If you use this method, you can control the final outcome of your photo since it does not affect the visual of your work. In simple words, a digital signature is a photo attribute that’s not visible on your photo, until someone downloads the file. 

Upon downloading it, the user has to either not use the photo or remove the signature by cropping it out. This is a very strong evidence of photo infringement as the user intentionally breaches copyright when cropping your signature out of the photo. 

5. Use an active protection & monitoring service

While all the ways described above could work, they require your time and energy and they still don’t cover one big need. Knowing who is using your work without your consent. The web is vast and you can’t always know who is infringing your right. 

Using a copyright protection and monitoring service, such as the one offered by CopyrightsWolrd, can make the protection of your rights much easier and efficient. When you upload your file you obtain indisputable evidence of copyright ownership in your email. Then with a simple click, you can add your files for infringement monitoring and receive reports when your rights are breached. 

This way you can be certain that your rights as a creator are protected and spend more time creating more of work than worrying about how to protect it. 

Conclusion 

Photo theft is a cruel reality enabled by the technology we all hold in our hands every day and while it can be hard to eliminate it, we can find new ways to protect our intellectual property by deterrenting potential attempts or acting on the ones that have already happened. 

The law that is our reference for answering this question is the Digital Millennium Copyright  Act (DMCA). DMCA is a 1998 United States copyright law that criminalizes production and dissemination of technology, devices, or services intended to circumvent measures that control access to copyrighted works (commonly known as digital rights management or DRM). It also criminalizes the act of circumventing an access control, whether or not there is actual infringement of copyright itself. The DMCA’s principal was adopted by the European Union in the Electronic Commerce Directive 2000.

Google’s Transparency report which is compliant with the DMCA is mentioning over 5 billion Urls being delisted due to copyright infringement. Along with Google, most social media have their own services for copyright infringement and takedown requests.

When the aforementioned, do not cover your case, you can send a DMCA take down notice. 

What is a take down notice?

A DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) takedown notice is a formal request by you as a copyright owner, to remove the infringed work from the website or property where it is used. 

If hosts and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) remove the content for which the take down notice was issued as soon as they are notified, the matter can be resolved. If not you should contact your lawyer or seek legal advice on how you should proceed. To do so, make sure that you have strong evidence of copyright ownership as you will need it when you engage in a legal dispute. 

When should you send a DMCA takedown notice?

You should be issuing a DMCA takedown notice if:

• You are the owner of the original work or you are authorized by the owner.
• There is no active license with the user for using  your work. This might be a good time to check on your expired licenses and whether your work was taken down upon expiration. 
• The infringer has not responded to your requests for properly licensing  your work. 
• You do not want to engage with the infringer.
• The person or business infringing your work is unlikely to pay for a license or compensation.

What do you want to achieve?

Like with all things in life, you should think about sending with a clear intention. Answer to yourself, “what do I want to achieve?” Do you simply want your work to be taken offline, or do you want to create a license and create an opportunity to increase your income? Is this a case from which you could claim damages?

Knowing what you want to achieve will allow you to decide upon the best course of action and get the desired outcome. 

Remember that visual and text based work is easily infringed since users  don’t need to log into a peer-to-peer file-sharing they can simply copy paste or right-click to download. As a result some infringers are unaware of the fact that work at state is protected by copyright laws, or that they have any legal obligation or even the possibility to pay for the use of it. You might be surprised how many people might be willing to license your work. 

If what you want is just your work to be taken down then go ahead and send  a takedown notice. But if you are interested in creating some new revenue sources, then you might want to aim for licensing. 

Conclusion 

Whatever you decide to do, one thing is for sure: You will need strong evidence of copyright ownership. And  you might want to do it as soon as you create your work before even sharing with anyone. Copyright basics still apply in the digital world. The person who wins is the one with the strongest evidence at the earliest time.  There are online copyright registration services available that help you do just that. There are some, like CopyrightsWorld, that also provide infringement monitoring services, that allow you to know when someone uses your work without permission. 

This week’s post looks at three well-known copyright infringement cases involving tech giants battling each other over ownership rights.

Apple vs. Microsoft

The battle between these two tech giants began with a simple question: “Who invented the graphical user interface (GUI)?” That’s because the company that controlled the interface of the next major operating system would be the one to set the standards for application software. Unsurprisingly, Apple tried to stop Windows from becoming a major operating system.

Although Microsoft helped develop Macintosh, Jean-Louis Gassée, who had taken over from Steve Jobs at the time, refused to allow Microsoft to use Apple’s software. Bill Gates pressed on nonetheless, deciding to add in features of his own.

When Gassée saw the software, he was enraged but didn’t want a lawsuit, so he ended up agreeing to license the interface. However, Windows 2.0 turned out to be almost identical, and Gassée believed this to be a breach of contract. You see, Apple had only allowed its software to be used on Windows 1.0 – and not future versions.

So, without warning, Apple filed a lawsuit against Microsoft in 1988. This lawsuit contained 189 visual displays that infringed copyrights. This led to a six-year legal battle, culminating in 1989, with the court ruling that 179 of the 189 disputed displays were covered by the existing license, and the remaining 10 did not violate Apple’s copyright. 

This was due to what is called the doctrine of merger – where the idea and the expression of the idea are separate. The same idea can be expressed in countless ways. 

The court ultimately ruled in Microsoft’s favour on August 24, 1993.

Case: Apple vs. Google

Apple is no stranger to court proceedings, especially against Google. Steve Jobs repeatedly called  Android a “stolen product” that he was “willing to go thermonuclear war” over.

Things got so heated between Apple and Google that former Google CEO (and current chairman) Eric Schmidt stepped down from his position on Apple’s Board of Directors.

When Apple sued Samsung in 2010, Google had to step in and help Samsung partly due to a ‘Mobile Application Distribution Agreement’ that gave “partial or full indemnity with regard to four patents.”

At the same time, Motorola sued Apple, accusing the tech giant of infringing several patents, including how cellphones operated on a 3G network. On the other hand, Apple claimed that Motorola violated its patent to certain smartphone features.

The copyright case was dismissed in 2012, on the grounds of insufficient evidence, when Google acquired Motorola. 

So far, frustrated judges have thrown out the Apple vs Motorola case three times, telling them to solve their problems between themselves.

Apple didn’t’ attack Google directly, but instead went after companies selling Android devices. Yet, the search giant has always been very intent on defending Android.

In 2014, Apple and Google released a joint statement saying that it had agreed to settle all patent litigation with Apple and would even “work together in some areas of patent reform.”

Case Apple vs. Samsung:

The Supreme Court presided over a few major technology cases in 2019, but in one of the most important ones, it reversed a ruling that found Samsung liable to pay its profit from the entire line of Galaxy phones in 2011. 

The devices were found to infringe on Apple’s design patents that cover the front of the phones, and the arrangement of icons on the home screen. 

In this case, Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that owners of design patents won’t always be entitled to the total profits from the infringing product. For example, the device has different components, so the award may be limited to specific infringing features. 

Chief Justice Roberts argued that “the design is applied to the exterior case of the phone” – and not “all the chips and wires.” Therefore profits shouldn’t be awarded based the phone’s full price.

Apple in turn argued that design is central to many products and therefore a patent violator should hand over the full profits from infringing designs. Samsung, on the other hand, argued that penalties should be proportionate to the importance of the infringing features to the actual product. 

The Supreme Court decided that things are not so clear-cut, as a liability in design patent cases doesn’t necessarily have to be “all-or-nothing.” Therefore, Apple and Samsung will have to go back to court to figure out what the appropriate amount of damages should be.

All too often it boils down to a case of ‘their word against yours’. Without proper protection, something you have created could end up making money for someone else.

So, what can you do in order to enhance your copyright ownership rights and be prepared for any case in the future?

Copyright Registration is the answer.

Here’s why it’s important to register your copyright as soon as you have completed your creation process.

Create Public Record of Ownership

Copyright registration creates a public record of your ownership. And ownership is the most common dispute when it comes to copyright. Also, the public screening of you copyright registration will discourage potential infringers and protect your work. A public record that demonstrates a claim to copyright will go a long way to demonstrate ownership in the event such ownership is challenged in the future. This public registration is a vital protection of the value of your copyrighted content.

Ability to File an Infringement Lawsuit

In many countries, you will not be able to commence a copyright infringement lawsuit without possessing a registration of your copyright. Therefore, registration provides additional credibility when/if the copyright owner is forced to serve a cease-and-desist letter on an alleged infringer. By registering the copyright of an original piece you validate  it and evidence the date of creation. Different countries have different rules on registration and even where countries do not have laws on registration, registering your copyright on an independent website is recommended as it will assist in collaborating the date of creation.

Presumption of validity of your copyright

In an infringement action, put very simply a copyright owner must establish (1) ownership of a valid copyright, and (2) copying of the original elements of the copyright. If registration was obtained either before publication or within five years of publication of the work, the registration certificate will constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of the copyright and the facts stated in the certificate (e.g., the author and date of completion). This means that rather than having to prove that you are the owner of a valid copyright, the court will presume that you satisfy the first element of copyright infringement and it will fall to the defendant to show otherwise. This presumption of validity can be especially advantageous when seeking immediate injunctive relief, such as a TRO or preliminary injunction.

Timely registration can enable the creator to seek damages for post-registration infringements.

Registering your copyright immediately after completing a creation is very important. Early registration enables a copyright owner to seek damages, lawyers’ fees and costs for infringement that occurs after the effective date of registration.

Licensing rights

If you have copyrighted works that have attracted the interests of other parties, you can explore your licensing options to make sure you can financially benefit from their use. Licensing is a legal authorisation from you to another party that permits them to use some (or all) of your copyrighted works. 

Summary

As you can tell, even though it is not mandatory, copyright registration provides valuable legal protection. It makes it easier for other people to find your protected material, as well as helping you to assert your legal rights by providing date stamped evidence of the exact or approximate creation date. It can help you mitigate the risk of expensive and timely litigation, whether you are a claimant or a defendant, as you have proof of ownership. Registration is essential if you ever find yourself filing or defending an infringement lawsuit and recommended for businesses and individuals alike, who wish to protect the inherent value of their work.

About the author

Harender Branch is a partner at UK law firm, Branch Austin – hkb@branchaustin.com. This blog is for information purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice or creating a formal relationship. No liability on the part of Copyrightsworld or Ms Branch attaches to any reliance placed on this blog and you are encouraged to seek legal advice if you have any queries. Copyrightsworld is able to recommend specialist lawyers to you, if needed.

If you are a business owner, or just take pride in your creations, you will be familiar with these terms. 

But despite hearing about them, you may have found it difficult to understand what they are, or how they are similar or differ from each other.. 

We wrote this article to shine some light on exactly those things.

Let’s first start with defining copyright and looking at how it works. 

Copyright

Whenever anything is created, whether it is a painting or a website, its creator automatically holds the sole legal copyright (often referred to as “intellectual property”) to it. 

Copyright allows the work’s owner to do with it as they please, including allowing others to make copies of it, or to use it with or without compensation.

A work’s copyright  owner is able to set all terms and conditions on how they would like to allow their work to be used, copied, or reproduced.

License

The term “license” literally means, “to give permission.” Licenses are given based upon how a work specifically allows others to use it by means of reproduction, and/or distribution. A license protects a work’s owner by allowing them to set terms for its use, while  allowing them to maintain its sole ownership through copyright. 

A person who wants to use a work, can pay to use it, but the license to do so doesn’t give them ownership, in any way.

Licenses can define numbers for use, conditions of use, as well as the time and length of use. Furthermore, a licensor can also grant a license which would allow licensees to freely use their work without an infringement claim.

Licensing can be used as a marketing or brand extension resource, by anyone – from small home-based businesses to large corporations. 

Finally, licensing can also be used as a business model without needing to make significant investment in equipment, facilities, or manufacturing processes.

Creative Commons

Creative Commons is the next generation of “licensing.” What makes it so different, is that it allows artists to share and use creative materials and knowledge through free legal tools.

The Creative Commons, offers free copyright licenses that allow public access to work, and the ability to use and share it  based upon conditions that the owner chooses. 

Creative Commons do not replace copyright; they work with copyright. This changes “all rights reserved” to “some rights reserved”, and allows rights owners  to choose and modify terms depending on how they decide to represent their work.. 

Creative Commons licensing is very simple, as it requires no registration to use. Creators choose one of six licences depending on their needs and standards and mark their work accordingly. 

Creative Commons licensing can be used for any type of work, including, music, photography, educational resources, databases, and many others. 

Pretty much anything can be covered by Creative Commons licensing.

Comparison

Now that we have looked at copyright, licenses, and Creative Commons, individually, let’s compare and contrast their distinguishing attributes. 

Creative Commons is more closely related to a license than it is to copyright. Copyright gives a work’s owner the exclusive rights to alter, copy, distribute, perform, display a work – and to allow others to do the same. 

Creative Commons licensing involves an owner allowing others to do the same, by setting terms and conditions. Creative Commons licensing makes it easy to manage copyright terms that are automatically connected to any creative work. 

The main differences between licensing and copyright are that a work’s creator owns sole rights to that work, whereas a license grants limited usage of the work, based upon restrictions the owner sets, defining how exactly the work can be used.

While there are many differences between copyright, licensing, and Creative Commons, it is important that you choose wisely when deciding how to protect your work. 

You wouldn’t want others to take advantage of you by claiming your work as their own. This could lead to a lengthy legal battle, which is the last thing you want to have to deal with. 

Do yourself – and your work – a favour, and protect your copyright before choosing how to licence it. In the end, you will be thankful you did.

In this week’s post, we look at well-known copyright infringement cases in the film industry.

Star Wars vs Battlestar Galactica

One of the most famous cases of copyright infringement in the film industry was between the notorious Star Wars movies and tv series Battlestar Galactica.  The claim was that Battlestar Galactica ‘used’ an excessive amount of ideas from the Star Wars. BattleStar Galactica was written and produced in 1977, the year when Star Wars’ first movie,  later subtitled Episode IV – A New Hope, aired in the cinemas. . 20th Century Fox sued Universal Studios (Battlestar Galactica) for stealing 34 distinct ideas from Star Wars. An example was Skyler, a character in Battlestar Galactica. Sounds familiar? Skywalker was one of the most (if not the most) important characters in Star Wars. They even considered airing the series with the title ”Star Worlds” but they went for Battlestar Galactica instead. Glen Larson, creator of Battlestar Galactica, explained that he agreed not to use special effects like laser beams, so they don’t resemble the ones from Star Wars and he understood that 20th Century Fox will not take any action, as per agreement between the two parties.

In addition, Universal Studios countersued Star Wars. Their claim was that Star Wars was using the robot drones from the 1972 film Silent Running. The case was remanded and then reportedly settled. However, the original Battlestar Galactica was cancelled after only 24 episodes, and instead The Empire Strikes Back aired at the cinemas. According to the Utah Law Student Land: “Instances of the characters, plot elements, political situations, etc. in popular pre-1977 science fiction suggest that these things were not invented by Star Wars.  Based on this evidence, a continued trial would probably have resulted in judgment favorable to Universal Studios, and the original Battlestar Galactica series might have lived to see its second season”.   

Avatar

James Cameron’s big movie hit is still considered among the most successful films ever made. As a result many wanted to get some of that success in claiming rights for some aspects of the film. In 2013, an artist called William Roger Dean, who designs album covers sued Cameron and Twenty Century Fox for ‘stealing’ his art from the Na’vi home of Pandora. He claimed that the landscapes depicted in the movie were similar to his own as seen on the album cover. Dean was claiming $50 million in damages, however the court declined his request as the art did not resemble the style from Cameron’s movie.

The Hangover Part II

In the movie The Hangover Part II, Ed Helms’s character wakes up after a crazy night with a face tattoo similar to Mike Tyson. As a consequence, the tattoo artist S. Victor Whitmill filed a copyright infringement lawsuit claiming it was the same tattoo he had created for Mike Tyson some years earlier. His case stood in court and in the end it was settled at undisclosed terms. 

To conclude, if there is one lesson that we learn from the copyright infringement cases described above is that ideas can not be copyrighted but creations can. 

Using the idea of other worlds and extraterrestrial life does not justify infringement unless you use the exact scripts and storylines but using the exact same creation like a tattoo without license does. 

In this week’s post, we look at two well-known copyright infringement cases involving big bands battling each other over ownership rights.

Vanilla Ice vs David Bowie & Queen

It was the early 90s when “Ice Ice Baby” was a top hit in the charts. We all knew Vanilla Ice back then. What many people don’t know, however, is that the song sampled the baseline of David Bowie and Queen’s hit “Under Pressure.” Vanilla Ice hadn’t credited the sample, and so he faced a copyright lawsuit by both Bowie and Queen. 

On top of not admitting his wrongdoing, he even made a public statement calling the lawsuit “a joke.” 

The case never made it to court, but Vanilla Ice paid Bowie and Queen an undisclosed amount, and finally credited them for the sample.

The Verve vs The Rolling Stones

Another famous example is the dispute between The Verve and the Rolling Stones, which began when The Verve sampled an orchestral version of the Stones’ song “The Last Time” written by arranger David Whitaker. The sample was used on The Verve’s most famous song – Bitter Sweet Symphony. 

While The Verve’s record company, Decca Records, cleared the rights to the orchestral  sample, they hadn’t cleared the rights to the song it was based on. 

So what happened next? Stones manager Allen Klein sued, but later agreed for the sample to be used but only if his record label took 100% of all the publishing rights to the song. 

As a result Bitter Sweet Symphony was released with Mick Jagger and Keith Richards credited as songwriters. 

At the time, The Verve’s frontman Richard Ashcroft told the BBC: 

“I think when you tip your hat to someone, you don’t sample them. You acknowledge them… that has always been part of music. The Stones couldn’t exist if they hadn’t been allowed to tip their hat to Chuck Berry and various others,” he added.

After more than 20 years, the case was actually totally resolved last November, with Mick Jagger and Keith Richards signing over all their rights for ‘Bitter Sweet Symphony’ to Ashcroft, who said “it was a truly kind and magnanimous thing for them to do.” 

At the end of the day, though, it was David Whitaker who wrote the original orchestral piece for “The Last Time,” and actually received no credit for it. If anyone, he should have been the one to receive credit for “Bitter Sweet Symphony.”