Copyright management for the independent creator.
Thanks to the wonderful folks at Graphic Artists Guild for hosting last week’s webinar talking about reasons to protect copyright–and how to do it using RightsClick! Watch the video below to learn why we think you can do a lot more about infringements of your work other than giving up or calling a lawyer.
For independent creators, every hour spent working on one’s copyright is an hour not spent on creating new work or running their business. As such, many creators either neglect their work’s copyright protection or pay someone else to handle it, often at great cost.
The reason for this is simple, the systems for organizing, registering and enforcing copyrights were, by in large, designed for large copyright holders. What works well for a large movie studio or record label doesn’t work well for independent creators.
by David Newhoff – Republished from The Illusion of More
I understand pursuing a fair use defense in a copyright case when the user of a work does something new and creative and believes there is a plausible argument to be made. I also understand why copyright skeptics file amicus briefs seeking opinions that would change the fair use doctrine. But what I find astonishing is the professional, who makes an archetypal use of a work, for which permission was obviously required, and then believes they can prevail on fair use through costly litigation. Because this keeps happening.
In the Spring of 2019, fine art and landscape photographer Elliott McGucken captured a transitory natural phenomenon—the sudden appearance of a lake in the middle of Death Valley, CA, known to be one of the hottest and driest places on Earth.[1] Heavy rains that March formed the 10-mile-wide ephemeral lake, of which McGucken made a series of beautiful and rare photographs, and several publications used his images by permission to accompany articles about the unusual event.[2] But when UK-based, digital publisher Pub Ocean failed to obtain permission for a similar use, McGucken sued for copyright infringement.
Using a photograph for illustrative purposes in an article or book is a paradigmatic use that requires license from the copyright owner. Newspapers, periodicals et al. have had to obtain permission for this purpose for as long as photographs have been protected by copyright law. Yet, despite this longstanding practice, even large commercial entities, perhaps lost in digital-age habits, too often use images without permission. Then, rather than settling with the photographer upon notification of the alleged infringement, these parties compound the error by litigating fair use defenses that will evaporate as surely as a lake in Death Valley.
by David Crewe
The recently established company is set to provide comprehensive copyright management including tools for portfolio management, registration of works, and a do-it-yourself (DIY) enforcement system for users to handle copyright infringements. Read the full story at PetaPixel.
(Reposted from The Illusion of More by David Newhoff)
The copyright small-claim alternative, adjudicated by the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), was intentionally designed to accommodate pro se participants, meaning that both claimants and respondents can represent themselves without hiring attorneys. After all, the foundation of small claims court or alternative dispute resolution is to save money. And indeed, we are seeing some early pro se claimants file complaints with the CCB, which began accepting claims on June 16th.
It occurred to me while co-moderating a copyright page on Facebook because, of course, social media encourages a habit of saying or asking everything that comes to mind. But one aspect of legal training the copyright owner/claimants, or for that matter defendants, likely do not have is the discipline to keep mum about an active case. Or at least what should and should not be discussed publicly.
Asking questions or making statements about administrative procedures related to the CCB are safe topics to discuss in public, but parties to a case should remember that it is a legal proceeding with a discovery process. That means anything you say about the facts pertaining to the case itself—including intentions, timelines, beliefs, etc.—may be discoverable and may be entered into evidence by the opposing party. And announcing, griping, gloating, or just describing these matters on social media makes discovery very easy for the opposing party.
This is not to suggest that either claimants or respondents are going to lie or have much to hide of any relevance to a typical CCB case. But if you are a party on either side, it is just good practice to do what an attorney would tell you to do and simply not talk about the case publicly until it’s resolved.
Keeping this discipline could prove difficult for some. Both alleged infringers and anti-copyright ideologues are known to at least insult, if not harass, copyright owners looking to enforce their rights. “Greedy” may be the kindest thing someone calls you, but don’t take the bait, don’t feed the troll, and don’t talk about your case until it’s over. By the same token, if you’re the claimant and you’ve filed a CCB claim, it’s probably not a good idea to also engage in that odd form of digital-age justice generally called “shaming.”
The copyright antagonists want to see the CCB fail. As copyright owners and advocates, we want the small-claim alternative to work, and work in a serious and fair manner grounded in the merits of claims and defenses. As such, both for your own sake and the overall effectiveness of a brand-new system, if you are party to a claim, it’s a good idea to exercise some social media discipline and keep most of the conversation about your case to yourself.
Any work created in the United States after January 1, 1978 is automatically protected by copyright law. BUT there’s a catch. If you do not register your work with the Copyright Office, you lose key enforcement tools. And if the party who infringed your work knows this, you lose leverage in trying to negotiate a settlement.
But if you look at it the other way, registration of your work with the U.S. Copyright Office is your legal backstop. It provides an avenue for litigation, which usually serves as a reason for settling out of court. It’s simple math. An infringer is more likely to pay a settlement rather than pay a lot more to defend himself in a case he probably won’t win. Ask any copyright attorney what they want most from creative professionals, and they will probably say that they want everyone who intends to protect their works to register them BEFORE those works enter the market in any form.
The best time to file a registration application with the Copyright Office is as soon as the work is done and before it enters the world — even social media. In addition to obtaining full protection for the work, there are certain financial advantages to registering right away.
For instance, groups of works that are not yet published can be registered in bundles of 10 per application–or up to 750 per application if they’re photographs. And since the meaning of “published” confuses a lot of people, registration before the works go anywhere is an easy way to be sure they are not published.
You can register works directly at the Copyright Office, but many people find the Copyright Office website clunky and confusing. As a RightsClick subscriber, our software will walk you through all the key information you need, help explain the technical terminology, and submit the application to the Copyright Office for you. At this time, we facilitate many common registration types (see chart below).
RightsClick charges a service fee to process your application, but our fees are much lower than other registration services. Plus, our application interface is easy to use, and once you register by using RightsClick, the registration information becomes part of the data you maintain in your Portfolio.
On June 16, 2022, the Copyright Claims Board (CCB) began receiving small claims by copyright owners. Unlike federal litigation, a small claim may be filed for infringement of a work that was not registered at the time of the infringement. BUT a registration application must be filed along with the CCB claim, and the Board will proceed with the claim after the Copyright Office has approved the registration. The Copyright Office has also reduced its expedited registration fee to $50, if the service is requested in conjunction with a CCB claim.
| Registration Fees per Application | USCO | RightsClick | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| One Work by One Author (no limit of claim) | $45 | $15 | $60 |
| One Work by One Author (w/limit of claim) | $65 | $15 | $80 |
| One Work Made for Hire | $65 | $15 | $80 |
| Group Photo Applications of <100 titles: | $55 | $15 | $70 |
| Group Photo Applications of ≥ 100: | $55 | $30 | $85 |
| Group of Unpublished Works (max 10 per application) | $85 | $15 | $100 |
| Work by More Than One Author | $65 | $15 | $80 |
What’s a Work Made for Hire? See our Glossary.
David Newhoff, copyright advocate, author, writer, and co-founder of RightsClick, Inc, appeared on this week’s episode of Employment Law Today hosted by Eric Sarver, Esq. David shared his knowledge, tips, and resources for copyright protection – including guidance for creative professionals.
TalkRadio.NYC streams live on Tuesday evenings, 5pm to 6pm (EST) and is posted on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, Google Play, and Amazon.
