University of Houston Illegally uses image and doesn't care!

[snowbear]

I guess infringement hasn't made it as a hot enough topic for governments to address it in bid and contract requirements.

 

[tirediron]

They used to have a competition for the brochure layout and let individuals submit their entries so if that is how it is still done, it wasn't an ad agency and it was just a private graphic artist that won the competition. No deep pockets there to go after if the photographer is just looking for a payday so he wanted to sue the institution (State).

So if this had happened to you, you'd be cool with it?

 

[KmH]

Copyright law allows for the use of copyrighted material for education. It is part of fair use.

Copyright fair use is not anywhere close to being that straight forward.
The US Copyright office notes that fair use is adjudicated by the federal courts on a case-by-case basis.

Columbia University Fair Use Checklist

The four factors listed in the Copyright Statute are only guidelines for making a determination as to whether a use is fair. Each factor should be given careful consideration in analyzing any specific use. There is no magic formula; an arithmetic approach to the application of the four factors should not be used. Depending on the specific facts of a case, it is possible that even if three of the factors would tend to favor a fair use finding, the fourth factor may be the most important one in that particular case, leading to a conclusion that the use may not be considered fair.

 

[Advanced Photo]

Your post in the thread University of Houston Illegally uses image and doesn't care!was deleted. Reason: Sorry; I was replying to your thread morning and accidentally pressed 'Edit' instead of 'Reply' and f**ked it all up. VERY sorry, and purely unintental.

First off, no problem, apology accepted, stuff happens, thanks for letting me know so I can re-post..
OK, in a nutshell:

They used to have a competition for the brochure layout and let individuals submit their entries so if that is how it is still done, it wasn't an ad agency and it was just a private graphic artist that won the competition. No deep pockets there to go after if the photographer is just looking for a payday so he wanted to sue the institution (State).

So if this had happened to you, you'd be cool with it?

Yes, I'd be inconvenienced but I'd have to accept at least part of the responsibility for it if I made the images accessible and unguarded.

If I leave the keys in my car and it's stolen, it's at least a little bit my fault, in fact the insurance won't pay for it at all because I caused it to happen.

If I sold image insurance and this person tried to collect because of the theft, I'd be forced to deny the claim based on the fact they did not do the things in their power to protect their property well enough to try to prevent it.

You have to at least make an attempt to protect your property and not just rely on the law to always work, sometimes it just doesn't.

 

[KmH]

I've not seen any reference that the photographer, Jim Olive, registered his copyright to the photo with the US Copyright office.
Many copyright legal experts say that a common mistake many photographers make when they discover someone using one of their photos without permission is to proffer a bill for use of the image.

So what should you do?
Help! I’ve Been Infringed! |

But because of the upside down situation regarding 'sovereign immunity' I would have to say, "Mr. Olive is SOL". trying to get paid for the use of the photo he made.

 

[unpopular]

They used to have a competition for the brochure layout and let individuals submit their entries so if that is how it is still done, it wasn't an ad agency and it was just a private graphic artist that won the competition. No deep pockets there to go after if the photographer is just looking for a payday so he wanted to sue the institution (State).

From a legal standpoint I don't know if it would matter, especially if the contest rules prohibits copyright infringement. OTOH, it might. If the college and the graphic artist do not have a proper client/provider relationship. That too would through a monkey wrench into things.

And this all depends on if the designer has a duty to disclose infringements (and I'm sure that they do). But I don't know if that duty would exist if the designer isn't technically hired or not (I'd imagine that they would, but again, I just don't know).

If this is the case, this is probably far too messy for any attorney to take on and make any money, and that probably has more to do with it than any state immunity issues - which only adds to the confusion.Even if The University could be sued, all they'd have to say is that they accepted the pamphlet design in good faith that it was legal.