Does any know about Copyright Registration

[smithdoor]

Does any know about Copyright Registration works or come by????

I have done pattens but have never work on copyrights and have been told story may or not work

Dave

[mamysboy11]

Hi Dave, I presume your question is in regard to photographic works? If not in general similar rules apply. Used to be, in my youth if I wrote an article, a thesis a novel or a song, I could protect (establish my rights to it) by sending a copy of the work to myself by registered post and leaving the envelope/package "unopened". The date of posting and of my receiving it was enough to establish my prior right to it. Nowadays, in most countries it is enough to have the first and original copy of the work in your possession to be the accepted owner. So if it is a great photo or photos, make a copy and keep the original. The Exif data or Info on the File should prove when it was created. On some cameras there is the facility to add your name to the creation data for the image file, although as Ken Rockwell points out the copyright symbol is still not in the typeface. Lightroom 4 and 5 I know, have a section where you can put creation and copyright data against the files/photos in the Develop Module.
A good place to read up on all this is by Googling "How to get copyright registration": There you will find in the U.S. it is easy to guard against plagiarism by following a few simple rules. Good luck...Tj mamysboy11

[bdkphoto]

Does any know about Copyright Registration works or come by????

I have done pattens but have never work on copyrights and have been told story may or not work

Dave

Tutorial and info here: http://asmp.org/content/registration-counts#.UpScAaUmW2w

Copyright office http://www.copyright.gov

[James515]

See links in reply. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?108187-Photos-of-Art

[ROL]

Photo Biz –> Copyrighting (http://www.rangeoflightphotography.com/pages/photo-business#copyrighting)

[Leigh]

Under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA), which is current US law, copyright vests to the creator at the time the work is created. No action is required by the creator, and no copyright notice is required, for that right to exist. It happens automatically.

There are further details and complications, of course. This was written by lawyers as an income source for lawyers.

- Leigh

[jnantz]

leigh

while what you say is correct and true, yes copyright is intrinsic in the creation of the negative
unfortunately, though if the images aren't registered with the copyright office, and the creator does not
have the registration declaring, he / she is the creator, allowing enforcement of the copyright law.
taking someone to the court and attempting to gain compensation for images published without consent &c is not easy.
( with the person publishing suggesting it is "orphaned" or not even bothering with that )

without the registration it just becomes a he-said / she-said routine, a murky case that no lawyer will take
and usually from what i was told a judge ( or clerk magistrate ) will not even bother with a case without
a registration.

i would suggest the OP goes to the copyright office, and follows the links to the VA ( visual artists ) gang registration FAQ
reads how to do it, and sends in the $35 it probably costs to get the "gang" registration.

in the end, it is a small price to pay, for the peace of mind that the images are registered and a pirate won't grab them and go.

if you search " copyright " in the forum search bar you will see a few threads that deal with copyright, infringement, and registration.

john

[bdkphoto]

Under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA), which is current US law, copyright vests to the creator at the time the work is created. No action is required by the creator, and no copyright notice is required, for that right to exist. It happens automatically.

There are further details and complications, of course. This was written by lawyers as an income source for lawyers.

- Leigh

The further details and complications render the "copyright when its created" pretty much useless in practical terms for photographers. If you are interested in protecting your work, all the relevant information on best practices for photographers is available at places like www.ASMP.org, APA. NPPA, and a few other photographic trade groups. Bottom line -- registration is necessary to avail yourself of actual protection under US law.

[bdkphoto]

leigh

while what you say is correct and true, yes copyright is intrinsic in the creation of the negative
unfortunately, though if the images aren't registered with the copyright office, and the creator does not
have the registration declaring, he / she is the creator, allowing enforcement of the copyright law.
taking someone to the court and attempting to gain compensation for images published without consent &c is not easy.
( with the person publishing suggesting it is "orphaned" or not even bothering with that )

without the registration it just becomes a he-said / she-said routine, a murky case that no lawyer will take
and usually from what i was told a judge ( or clerk magistrate ) will not even bother with a case without
a registration.

i would suggest the OP goes to the copyright office, and follows the links to the VA ( visual artists ) gang registration FAQ
reads how to do it, and sends in the $35 it probably costs to get the "gang" registration.

in the end, it is a small price to pay, for the peace of mind that the images are registered and a pirate won't grab them and go.

if you search " copyright " in the forum search bar you will see a few threads that deal with copyright, infringement, and registration.

john

Copyright registration IS a federal requirement to file suit. No registration, no case in court.

It's all here-- http://asmp.org/content/registration...s#.UpScAaUmW2w --take some time and read it, well worth the time if you are actually interested in best practices for photographers.

[Greg Miller]

Here's the direct link where you can register your copyright online: eco.copyright.gov (http://eco.copyright.gov).

[smithdoor]

Thank you all
good information
This not hard to do.

Dave

[jnantz]

Copyright registration IS a federal requirement to file suit. No registration, no case in court.

It's all here-- http://asmp.org/content/registration...s#.UpScAaUmW2w --take some time and read it, well worth the time if you are actually interested in best practices for photographers.

exactly ..

thanks

[jae1w3]

Does any know about Copyright Registration works or come by????

I have done pattens but have never work on copyrights and have been told story may or not work

Dave

Even though it is said that copyright belongs to you after you have taken the photo,there can be problems in case of real theft.In case of a theft you can File DMCA(US) Take-down notice to ask the website infringing your copyright to remove the photo.But this depends on whether the potential thief is located in a country which honors the same.What i do is i watermark and resize(large resolution photos) before i upload them to the web.Im using a software called Mass Watermark http://www.masswatermark.com/ to do this,it allows me to watermark,resize and add exif to multiple photos.Then i upload directly to the web or using its feature to export to picasa/Flickr.It is also recommended to register copyright(occasionally)

Hope this helps

[ROL]

What i do is i watermark and resize(large resolution photos) before i upload them to the web.

I assume by resize you meant make them small for web consumption. This is my number one rule in dealing with the internet. Making them small enough, say, no larger than 600 pixels on largest side at no more than 72 dpi, will make images worthless for any generally important coherent uses (e.g., like printing at normal sizes), other than on the net itself. This has the additional value of ensuring that the image will load quickly at normal DSL speeds.

I have never been concerned enough about unauthorized use of my own web images to despoil them visually by watermarking them in any fashion. The web is all about images, and to deny global reach to original work in this manner seems a bastardization of the aesthetic of photography. Unfortunately, and perhaps without justification, I judge others who employ watermarking on the net as insecure dilettantes.