So my photos got stolen and used for ads

astroNikon · Jan 7, 2016

im2c0ol said:
I check ebay report no option for photo copyright.

eBay, Paypal, etc don't like to be bothered. You have to call them and TALK to a person to get any response.

But truthfully it seems like you don't seem too bothered by this .. 6 to 12 months later.

im2c0ol · Jan 7, 2016

At this point I just want him to take it down, I sent him an email yesterday. Didn't get a response back yet.

KmH · Jan 7, 2016

Help! I’ve Been Infringed! | Photo Attorney
Option #4 – Prepare a Cease and Desist/Demand Letter Yourself
When you don’t want to alienate the infringer (the infringer is a potential client and/or appears to be an innocent infringer), you may want to contact the infringer to explain that the use is not authorized and either request payment of an appropriate license fee, a photo credit with a link to your website (as discussed above), or that the infringer cease use of the image. It’s best to do this in writing – a letter by surface mail seems to have more clout than email correspondence.

Photographers sometimes send an infringer an invoice for three times their normal license fee in an attempt to resolve the infringement issue. While the 3x fee may be an industry standard and some courts have used it, is not a legal right given by any court of law or statute. Instead, U.S. law states that you are entitled to actual or statutory damages for infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. Chapter 5, specifically section 504. The damages that you can receive from infringement – especially if you timely register your photographs – sometimes can amount to a lot more than three times your normal license fee. So you may want to think 2x before you send the 3x letter.

There are some risks in sending the letter yourself. First, the infringer may attempt to preempt an infringement lawsuit and file a request for declaratory judgment that the use is authorized. This may involve you in a legal action for which you may need legal counsel in a jurisdiction (court location) where you don’t want to litigate. Second, your demand for payment may be admissible against you if an infringement case is filed. If you demand too little, then it may limit your ultimate recovery. To avoid this possibility, include in your demand letter that “these discussions and offer to settle are an attempt to compromise this dispute.”

Dave442 · Jan 7, 2016

I think as the others noted, best option is contacting Paypal direct or, if contacting the party that posted the photo then best is to have your lawyer contact them.

Their Paypal page has a lot of car shots and there is a good chance they pulled many of those off other sites. They even have a shot of another Subaru in a parking garage that almost looked like yours.

tirediron · Jan 10, 2016

Buckster said:
...However, it ISN'T true as long as you're pursuing monetary compensation - the attorney simply takes his percentage cut of the settlement when the infringer pays. Not that it matters much to the infringers out there, since they know that most people believe they'll need to pay attorney fees up front, especially when people seen as authority figures like, say, a moderator on a photography forum, says it, so the photographers don't think they can afford to pursue it. Even more so when others chime in and agree that it's true you'll have to pay attorney fees up front just to get started....

Those darn photography forum moderators... always giving out bad advice...

Okay, putting aside the whole "If you actually act on legal advice you got on an Internet forum..." argument, you are correct Buckster, IF you can find a lawyer who will accept this case on a contingency-fee basis, then you shouldn't be out of pocket up front. This may be an area where our two countries differ significantly, and I'm by no means an expert on US copyright law, but in Canada, based on the presentations I've attended by two well respected IP lawyers, most would not accept this as a contingency-fee case because the potential settlement would not be large enough to make it worth while for them, therefore it would an hourly fee with (typically) a ten-hour retainer up-front.

KmH · Jan 10, 2016

Buckster said:
. . . get an emergency copyright registration . . .

Can you provide a Copyright.gov link to how one gets an "emergency copyright registration" ?

I've Submitted My Application, Fee, and Copy of My Work to the Copyright Office. Now What? (FAQ) | U.S. Copyright Office
How long does the registration process take, and when will I receive my certificate?

The time the Copyright Office requires to process an application varies, depending on the number of applications the Office is receiving and clearing at the time of submission and the extent of questions associated with the application.
Current processing times are:
Processing Time for e-Filing: generally, up to 8 months
Processing Time for Paper Forms: generally, up to 13 months
Note: For works that are determined to be copyrightable and that meet all legal and procedural requirements for registration, the effective date of registration is the date the Copyright Office received the completed application, correct payment, and copy(ies) of the work being registered in acceptable form. You do not need to wait for a certificate to proceed with publication.

Buckster · Jan 11, 2016

KmH said:
Buckster said:

. . . get an emergency copyright registration . . .

Click to expand...

Can you provide a Copyright.gov link to how one gets an "emergency copyright registration" ?

Link:
Special Handling (FAQ) | U.S. Copyright Office

Buckster · Jan 11, 2016

tirediron said:
Buckster said:

...However, it ISN'T true as long as you're pursuing monetary compensation - the attorney simply takes his percentage cut of the settlement when the infringer pays. Not that it matters much to the infringers out there, since they know that most people believe they'll need to pay attorney fees up front, especially when people seen as authority figures like, say, a moderator on a photography forum, says it, so the photographers don't think they can afford to pursue it. Even more so when others chime in and agree that it's true you'll have to pay attorney fees up front just to get started....

Click to expand...

Those darn photography forum moderators... always giving out bad advice... Okay, putting aside the whole "If you actually act on legal advice you got on an Internet forum..." argument, you are correct Buckster, IF you can find a lawyer who will accept this case on a contingency-fee basis, then you shouldn't be out of pocket up front. This may be an area where our two countries differ significantly, and I'm by no means an expert on US copyright law, but in Canada, based on the presentations I've attended by two well respected IP lawyers, most would not accept this as a contingency-fee case because the potential settlement would not be large enough to make it worth while for them, therefore it would an hourly fee with (typically) a ten-hour retainer up-front.

I can only tell you about the things I've learned about this subject after studying several books on it, watching several seminar-type videos, and personally participating in the process of pursuing compensation for my own copyrighted works through legal representation, never on my own, never with me contacting or negotiating with the infringers directly.

Beyond a paper filing cabinet with contracts, agreements, and so forth for each case, I have a database I built and use for tracking and maintaining clarity on the nature and current state of each and every one of the copyright issues I have going on in my world. At present, there are 223 separate cases in my database, each with their own tracking number. More are added as I discover them and initiate the process anew. Most are in some state of progress between initiation and resolution. Last year 33 were resolved satisfactorily with payment to me and my representative.

My representative in these matters and I split the amount the infringer pays, 50-50. So, when the infringer pays $5000.00, for example, my rep and I each deposit $2500.00. Of those 33 settled cases from last year, the lowest amount an infringer paid was $50, which my rep and I split, for $25 each. Like it or believe it or not, that's the actual lowest number in my database.

Now, that's not much, and one might easily believe that nobody would represent my interests for such a small amount, especially after reading the sorts of things so often found on internet forums like the post I'm responding to here, but there are a couple of factors to consider when looking at that small amount.

1. Neither my rep nor I had any real idea how much we'd end up with when I initiated the process after discovering the infringement. That is always true, every time. In the end, the amount was negotiated between my rep and the infringer, based on several factors, as I've explained in the other thread that I linked to.

2. My rep knows that I and my work represent an ongoing source of infringement cases to pursue. As I mentioned, there are currently 223 cases in my database, and 33 of them were resolved last year alone, with many others still ongoing, or resolved before 2015. Those 33 resolved cases last year yielded almost $16,000.00 for each of us, with the infringers obviously paying twice that.

Copyright attorneys worth their salt who are not trying to shyster their clients don't starve by taking on a case that only yields them $25 in the end, because they make up for it with cases that pay many times that amount. That's true whether it's many cases from me, or many cases from many copyright owners and, again, one never knows what that final dollar amount will be, being up to negotiation between the parties, or a judge if it goes all the way to Federal Court. Even those that may initially appear to be worth very little can turn out to pay quite large sums, or vice-versa, and there's no way to know for sure in advance.

The broad brush strokes regarding attorneys, representatives, payments up front, big bucks to pursue infringement, that lawyers won't take on small-fry cases and all the rest of the stuff commonly seen on internet forums by people who talk like they know something, but have never actually pursued an infringement case themselves - are debunked quite handily by my own experiences with it all, and especially by the numbers I see flowing into my bank account month after month.

Don't believe me on these issues? No skin off my wallet. Another check arrived Saturday. I'll be depositing it today.

astroNikon · Jan 11, 2016

Great income revenue stream Buckster.

In the case of the OP though, he has ONE photograph out there. Of course, he would have to start trolling all the sites with car photos to see if his shows up and creates a cyclical process with a lawyer for this. So in your case it is well worth it.

For the OP, he has 1 photo he has a complaint about. A copyright attorney might not take that on a contingency fee basis unless he first did the copyright registration. And then, it's been quite some time which is good for getting more money, or getting less. but then I've never sued anyone for this so what do I know.

Buckster · Jan 11, 2016

astroNikon said:
Great income revenue stream Buckster.

In the case of the OP though, he has ONE photograph out there. Of course, he would have to start trolling all the sites with car photos to see if his shows up and creates a cyclical process with a lawyer for this. So in your case it is well worth it.

For the OP, he has 1 photo he has a complaint about. A copyright attorney might not take that on a contingency fee basis unless he first did the copyright registration. And then, it's been quite some time which is good for getting more money, or getting less. but then I've never sued anyone for this so what do I know.

I can certainly appreciate that. Consider my information purely informational.

For those who pursue photography, it doesn't take long to have a large catalog of images. And photos, like memes, spread. When a photo gets popular, next thing you know it's being used by several different web sites, and from there it can end up anywhere in the real world of print, where it can be quite difficult to find. And here's an odd thing: You just never know which one is gonna catch somebody's fancy for whatever reason. When it happens, it's good to be prepared and to know how to handle it, and that starts with a registered copyright. Take down, credit, or monetary, it's the legal teeth needed to enforce one's rights, if the copyright holder really want to be taken seriously.

Now, keep in mind that everything in that last paragraph applies to all photographers, from the lowliest hobbyist to the top pros. Those in the know in marketing know that it's a lot easier to blow off a hobbyist who probably doesn't know any better, than a seasoned pro who does. The key is not to let them, and to know that you don't have to.

To each his/her own, of course. Each can use the information or not, given their own unique circumstances. But it's at least good to know that it exists.

It's good to run some searches on one's images once in a while, btw.