Copyrighting Photos

[pborgbarthet]

Can someone tell me how I go about copyrighting my photos, or some of them so that they can not be copied or used by anyone without my permission.

Thanks.

 

[PatriK-b]

Can someone tell me how I go about copyrighting my photos, or some of them so that they can not be copied or used by anyone without my permission.

Thanks.

Keep' em on your local drive. I'm serious, if someone see them displayed, it's too late.

 

[WDodd]

Someone is always going to find a way to "copy" stuff. If you are displaying your pictures online 99% of the time the resolution is too small to get decent prints from it anyways.

However if you want to stop use on other websites or from them saving it on their computers then I don't think you have a chance.

 

[keith204]

Watermark your online photos. Wallymart's not gonna develop photos that have your website name stamped across the photo. Sure, they can print them on their own computer... but as a previous poster mentioned... who's gonna really want a 72dpi print? let alone one with a watermark!

I take and sell raceway photos, and am in the same boat you are. I have begun uploading my photos to a coppermine gallery at http://www.w3bolivar.com/cpg. The first few dates aren't watermarked, and when people came up to my booth at the races, a few would say "Wha?? you want five bucks for a photo? I'll stick with the copy I printed off the internet!" So, I learned how to batch watermark .

 

[WDodd]

Lightroom and Smugmug can automatically apply watermarks to your pictures.

Smugmug can be set to right click prevent so people, if they are computer illiterate enough, will be thwarted if they are trying to save a picture.

 

[Garbz]

In reality a photo the size keith just posted will not be anywhere near enough for a 6x4 print. That's why I don't bother watermarking or protecting my images, it also makes them easier to view. I just sign the bottom left. Mind you I don't have any financial incentive to do so since I do not sell prints online, and all by my portrait photos are taken for the fun of photography and not for some spare change. It may be very different for many others here.

 

[ANDS!]

I'm guessing most go the watermark route not to prevent prints - but to prevent use in an online environment. Say for example someone wanted to use the racing pics for a "Racers For Pushing Old Ladies Down Stairs!" campaign. I can see where you'd want to be able to step in and say "Hey fella - not cool".

As for copyrighting them, you can go the tedious route of registering the photograph (along with a fee) to the feds, or just lie and say your work is copyrighted, "pull it down".

 

[jon_k]

As for copyrighting them, you can go the tedious route of registering the photograph (along with a fee) to the feds, or just lie and say your work is copyrighted, "pull it down".

Lie and say your work is copyrighted? Most major nations use the Berne copyright convention rules. These rules give you copyright for any work you create the instant you create it. Theres no need to mail a photograph to yourself or register it or something (though this was true that you had to in the past, before the U.S. adopted the Berne convention, so you're not wrong per se, just as of recent things have changed.)

If I recall correctly, anything created privately and originally after April 1989 is copyrighted. It is copyrighted and protected weather it has a notice on it or not. There are some old works that lost protection without notice, because works made before April 1989 required a specific notice.

This means when you crack that shutter and photons hit your film or CCD, it's copyrighted. What you choose to do with your copyright (release in public domain, transfer copyright, etc.) is up to you.

DISCLAIMER: IANAL (I am not a lawyer)

 

[ANDS!]

Just going off here and here and finally here.

The second link seems pretty exhaustive in gathering information regarding any number of subjects. It makes sense to me that something that is yours is yours - but if it ever became an issue, how would you demonstrate its yours, especially if you're posting raw information online?

 

[jon_k]

Just going off here and here and finally here.

The second link seems pretty exhaustive in gathering information regarding any number of subjects. It makes sense to me that something that is yours is yours - but if it ever became an issue, how would you demonstrate its yours, especially if you're posting raw information online?

Well that part becomes up to you and your lawyer to prove. Without proving that YOU made it, I can see how that could be an expensive court battle. I guess the only true safe harbor is to watermark your images with a copyright notice, with your name and date. This would make proof easier in court.

I guess in the previous days you had to REGISTER a copyright for it to be copyright work, and now days you just have to create your work to have it copyrighted. Unfortunately simply painting a painting and having it "magically instantly copyrighted" doesn't prove you painted it to the courtroom. So in the end, you still have to establish the fact you own the copyright through means of registration, mailing it to yourself in sealed envelope, or other means.

Someone I think mentioned above "keep a local copy on your computer". This wouldn't be the definitive proof either. You'd think having a copy of the image and the "date created" or "last modified date" would create your proof. Those timestamps are easily manipulated on a computer file system though.

 

[keith204]

...Something in the left saying Copyright mmddyy myname is fine though....

Who knows how to crop, anyway?

 

[gmarquez]

Copyright is automatic when you create the work.

However, REGISTERING the copyright (at least in the US) gives you additional benefits:

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ40.html
"There are, however, certain advantages to registration, including the establishment of a public record of the copyright claim. Copyright registration must generally be made before an infringement suit may be brought. Timely registration may also provide a broader range of remedies in an infringement suit."

More info on how to register a visual works copyright in the US:
http://www.copyright.gov/register/visual.html

 

[keith204]

also, I agree that the watermark across the photo can be distracting. BUT I would say this all depends on the type of picture.

For my race pictures, I think a larger watermark (mostly transparent, by the way) is the best way to reduce the amount of people ripping my pictures off the internet...because I sell these pictures weekly. However, if I was to post a picture of a sunset over a prairie with a lone tree.... a large watermark like this is totally inappropriate. In this case, a small watermark will be best.

 

[Chronicle]

I agree with the previous posters.

 

[jon_k]

Seems according to copyright.gov to officially register a "group of photographs" it costs $45

To have a copy of records made for you (in the event you needed proof for a court, you'd need to request the records) it's $15 to get a copy of the records for Polaroids (film I guess?) and $45 to request records for a digital image.

Pretty cheap if you get shots you really care about protecting. I've not taken any shots worth protecting for those fee's yet though. (Of course, any shot you take that you later find in a commercial magazine might have been worth copyrighting officially. That way you could make the big bucks off their illegal reproduction!)