Copying, ownership and legality of your internet hosted images and other intlcl prop.

KTMphil

KTMphil

Senior member
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Location
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Bikes
2007 KTM 990 Adventure Suzuki DRZ 400
Copying, ownership and legality of your internet hosted images and other intellectual property


We had a situation in the last couple of days where images from RideAsia.net were stolen and copied onto a competitors website without permission. In this situation the right thing to do is to contact the webhosting company that hosts the offending website and make a DMC (digital media claim).


Within a couple of hours were given notice by their web-hoster that a "take down" notice has been issued to the offending website and the violating images had been removed.


See the replies from the web-hosting company below:
8648973548_41d908b21d_b.jpg





Then successful resolution - the illegally copied images were removed


8648973558_f052a1dd9e_b.jpg




 
With the explosion of social media, nearly everyone has intellectual property on the internet, most have theirs set to a "public" legality setting. We're now getting into the legal realms of copyright law and this could go on for 500 internet pages, so let's try keep it in summary form to what effects most people.



Some summary points that seem important:


1. Where are your photo's actually hosted? The registered sovereign nation (country) of the company you host the images with is where the legality is important. Many forums don't offer upload/ hosting and require you to link your image from being hosted elsewhere, so they will argue that they aren't hosting the infringing image, but for the sake of all the hassle will probably want the image removed anyway if aware of a violation. If your image hosting account is set to public and you don't have a copyright/ license watermarked on the photo, you will have a hard time keeping exclusivity to that image even if someone makes USD$ 1,000,000 from it. If you want to keep control of your online intellectual property, watermark it and license it with your web-hoster (mine is set to Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs - more on that later)




2. Facebook


With most people having a facebook account and 90% of those having their account setting set to public, under the agreements you sign up to with facebook, with a public setting and no copyright/ license watermarked on your photo there is very little you can do if someone steals it and uses it. check here: www.facebook.com/terms.php


"For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos ("IP content"), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook ("IP License"). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it".



We had a situation recently where someone claimed their images had been been stolen & as they discovered the images used were from uploaded to a friends public facebook account with authorized use from them.
 
In Dutch we say: "name man and horse" So which pictures were stolen from RA and put on GTR and who actually did that?
With so many people posting same content on both websites it is surely difficult to assertain what is actually owned by who?!
 
3. Digital Licences for your publically hosted images


For Yahoo's Flickr hosting, the best "lockdown" license they offer is Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs "This license is the most restrictive of our six main licenses, only allowing others to download your works and share them with others as long as they credit you, but they can't change them in any way or use them commercially". The whole definition is in this link all in legal jargon - i wont copy it Creative Commons Legal Code



All Flickr's licenses can be viewed here:


http://creativecommons.org/licenses/


4. Forums/ websites


If the forum/ website allows you to upload photo's then you will have good legal control over your images/ intellectual property. They can display a legal copyrighting notice on the website that will protect you.






Hopefully the above will give you something to think about and how vulnerable your "public" images hosted on the internet are without the correct legal setup.
 
brake034 said:
In Dutch we say: "name man and horse" So which pictures were stolen from RA and put on GTR and who actually did that?
With so many people posting same content on both websites it is surely difficult to assertain what is actually owned by who?!
Click to expand...



14 months difference in posting time
 
A couple of important links:




The Digital Millennium Copyright Act


Digital Millennium Copyright Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





Protecting internet service providers


DMCA Overview




Take Down Notice

[h=3]Takedown notice[/h]Google asserted misuse of the DMCA in a filing concerning New Zealand's copyright act,[SUP][25][/SUP] quoting results from a 2005 study by Californian academics Laura Quilter and Jennifer Urban based on data from the Chilling Effects clearinghouse.[SUP][26][/SUP] Takedown notices targeting a competing business made up over half (57%) of the notices Google has received, the company said, and more than one-third (37%), "were not valid copyright claims."[SUP][2[/SUP]
 
If you took a picture, do you own what is on it?

Phra Ajahn Chah

"We practice to learn how to let go, not how to increase our holding on to things. Enlightenment appears when you stop wanting anything."
 
The DCMA is an American law, not an international one, so look like it will be difficult to implement in a Thai court?
 
brake034 said:
The DCMA is an American law, not an international one, so look like it will be difficult to implement in a Thai court?
Click to expand...




Actually


"The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a United States copyright law that implements two 1996 treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)"



(First line Digital Millennium Copyright Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)\\





World Intellectual Property Organization

WIPO currently has 185 member states,[SUP][2][/SUP] administers 24 international treaties,[SUP][3][/SUP] and is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. The current Director-General of WIPO is Francis Gurry, who took office on October 1, 2008.[SUP][4][/SUP] 184 of the UN Members


( Thailand is one of them)
 
Phil, unless you make allegations specific, i.e. name and shame, this is an academic discussion!
We can have a 100 year discussion on who owns what but that does not cut any wood, unless we know WHAT we are talking about and WHO did it.
As some of us almost share the color of our underwear on both sites, I see no relevance of the academic discussion unless there is a real, discussable violation of copyright.
 
Happy Songkran all together take a Bucket of cold Water too cool down a little bit we all like to drive Motorbikes even if we prefer different ForumGurus
Cheers and Happy Trails
 
More people should read the first line on the home page for this forum.....RideAsia Motorcycle Forums are developed & maintained by riders for riders, without commercial constraints or influences, bringing a free spirit approach to online motor biker information.
 
Derivative copyright



Derivative work - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"For copyright protection to attach to a later, allegedly derivative work, it must display some originality of its own. It cannot be a rote, uncreative variation on the earlier, underlying work. The latter work must contain sufficient new expression, over and above that embodied in the earlier work for the latter work to satisfy copyright law's requirement of originality".





Disney


"If I take a picture of an object with my own camera, I hold the copyright to the picture. Can't I license it any way I choose? Why do I have to worry about other copyright holders"?

By taking a picture with a copyrighted cartoon character on a t-shirt as its main subject, for example, the photographer creates a new, copyrighted work (the photograph), but the rights of the cartoon character's creator still affect the resulting photograph. Such a photograph could not be published without the consent of both copyright holders: the photographer and the cartoonist.
It doesn't matter if a drawing of a copyrighted character's likeness is created entirely by the uploader without any other reference than the uploader's memory. A non-free copyrighted work simply cannot be rendered free without the consent of the copyright holder, not by photographing, drawing nor sculpting (but see Commonsfreedom of panorama).
 
Phil, after understanding the full story I also understand I wrote stupid and not relevant things in this thread, I do appologize for that!

Marcel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom