Situations where copyright of a photo is legally taken from you?

11 months 3 weeks ago #601471 by Miss Polly
Random question, so nothing happening here other than curious about this.  


Are there any situations where a photo that you have taken, you own it, and have copyright over it, can legally be taken away from you?


Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago #601474 by Nikon Shooter
Taken? Legally? NEVER!

One may give or sell it but it is right of property… by law.

Light is free… capturing it is not!
This person is a posting maniac and deserves a #1 badge!Top Poster

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago #601476 by effron
Yeah, nobody can "take" your copyright legally.

Why so serious?
Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago - 11 months 2 weeks ago #601482 by Aeros
The copyright act provides protection to the original author in two forms. Intellectual and moral. Intellectual copyright may be assigned to another party via a contract for use and a signed agreement must be retained by both parties.

Moral copyright, protects the interests of the original author for the life of the original author and in Canada for fifty years beyond the original author’s death. Moral copyright is incontrovertible, a party who has acquired rights to the work via agreement by contract under the rules of Intellectual Copyright, is bound by the doctrine of Moral copyright. To give you an example; a sculptor in Toronto sold a bronze of some flying geese to a very large Canadian retailer. The retailer had the work hung from the ceiling in a downtown Toronto store. One Christmas, the store management decided to wrap red bows around the necks of the sculpture of the Canada Geese.

The sculptor got wind of it and directed the store management to remove the bows to which they refused. There was a suit by the sculptor and he won his legal action on the claim that tying the red bows on the sculpture he created (and was still protected by Moral Copyright), was a copyright infringement by conversion. One can buy an original painting, if it is copyright protected by the original author, the purchaser is bound by the copyright act, not to alter any part of the painting, is prohibited from selling reproductions, the list goes on.

I hope this provides more insight to the Copyright Act as instituted by the Berne Treaty to which most western governments are signatories. I would strongly recommend anyone producing works that qualify for Copyright protection, to read the act. It’s very easy reading, clear and concise.


Photo Comments
The following user(s) said Thank You: Ozzie_Traveller

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago #601483 by Miss Polly
Well you never know these days.  And honestly, it was just a curious thing for this morning.  I wasn't sure if government could take if sensitive government official was in photo, etc.  


Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago #601484 by Aeros
Not if the sensitive government official was photographed in a public place were there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. This in itself is not a copyright issue. It's more about how the photo is used and if there is financial gain to the photographer without permission from the subject.


Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago #601487 by Miss Polly
Gotcha, OK, well that was just a random example that stemmed one of my thoughts on this.  


Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago - 11 months 2 weeks ago #601513 by Troponin
Here is what I know, but it doesn’t really relate to
your situation

Copyright laws kinda suck. Although they do
protect you, it’s only
protection in theory. there are also loopholes and the courts have proven they known nothing about the art of photography. 

The law states that if any “reasonable” alteration has been made to a photo, it can be stolen and considered their own work. For instance, a photo can be simply
cropped and now that “art” belongs to someone else. I could also draw a
smiley face on your photos and they are now mine and I can make money from them.

Basically, it cant be used to make money if you don’t have rights to the photo. 

All that being said, the system is broken. It costs
thousands to fight and it most likely won’t be worth it.  


Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago #601977 by garyrhook

Troponin wrote: Here is what I know, but it doesn’t really relate to
your situation

Copyright laws kinda suck.


No, they don't. They are helpful and good.

Although they do protect you, it’s only protection in theory.


No, it's not. Please provide concrete examples supporting your statement.

 there are also loopholes and the courts have proven they known nothing about the art of photography. 


Courts make mistakes. That's why there's an appeals process. Things often get worked out. Again, concrete examples?

The law states that if any “reasonable” alteration has been made to a photo, it can be stolen and considered their own work.


No, it can't. Reasonable courts call that "derivative work", which is covered by copyright. Again, any concrete examples to the contrary?

 For instance, a photo can be simply cropped and now that “art” belongs to someone else. I could also draw a smiley face on your photos and they are now mine and I can make money from them.

Basically, it cant be used to make money if you don’t have rights to the photo. 

All that being said, the system is broken. It costs
thousands to fight and it most likely won’t be worth it.  


Your "examples" (statements, really) are unsupported opinions, without basis in fact. Please cite specific examples, and let's discuss. As for fighting,  please don't conflate. Dealing with the legal system under the current US copyright law is a challenge, yes, which is beginning to become apparent to all. Join the Copyright Alliance and help change the laws.

But that has nothing to do with whether copyright law is useful, valued, and effective. I'll stop there.


Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago #602128 by Francis
What make copyright laws the big evil monster is they intimidate people because the don't understand  them.  Not saying that I do 100%, but there is much to know about them and now to protect yourself/images.  

There are also services out there that you can subscribe too that will safe guard your interests.  


Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago #602392 by icepics
I was thinking that if a person who was some sort of official was in a sensitive situation you probably wouldn't have access to be able to take photos anyway - unless you were a working photojournalist or a photographer hired to cover that person. If an official was out in public I think there's an expectation that you could talk to the person, take a picture, etc. (as Aeros talked about).

If somehow there was a situation that you got a photo of a person who was in a sensitive job of some sort, I don't even know if copyright would be affected as much as usage. You wouldn't be able to use a photo to make money from it without a signed release anyway, at least not for retail or commercial/business use. For editorial use like a newspaper or media outlet typically a release wouldn't be needed (but may be requested).

Anyone can get on the US Copyright Office website and look up how to register copyright. You automatically own the copyright on photos you take, but if you'd be using the photos and want to protect your work, it supposedly can help in dealing with any copyright violations.

Sharon
Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago - 11 months 2 weeks ago #602393 by Troponin

garyrhook wrote:

Troponin wrote: Here is what I know, but it doesn’t really relate to
your situation

Copyright laws kinda suck.


No, they don't. They are helpful and good.

Although they do protect you, it’s only protection in theory.


No, it's not. Please provide concrete examples supporting your statement.

 there are also loopholes and the courts have proven they known nothing about the art of photography. 


Courts make mistakes. That's why there's an appeals process. Things often get worked out. Again, concrete examples?

The law states that if any “reasonable” alteration has been made to a photo, it can be stolen and considered their own work.


No, it can't. Reasonable courts call that "derivative work", which is covered by copyright. Again, any concrete examples to the contrary?

 For instance, a photo can be simply cropped and now that “art” belongs to someone else. I could also draw a smiley face on your photos and they are now mine and I can make money from them.

Basically, it cant be used to make money if you don’t have rights to the photo. 

All that being said, the system is broken. It costs
thousands to fight and it most likely won’t be worth it.  


Your "examples" (statements, really) are unsupported opinions, without basis in fact. Please cite specific examples, and let's discuss. As for fighting,  please don't conflate. Dealing with the legal system under the current US copyright law is a challenge, yes, which is beginning to become apparent to all. Join the Copyright Alliance and help change the laws.

But that has nothing to do with whether copyright law is useful, valued, and effective. I'll stop there.


Cariou v Prince and look at how much they spent on that case. Overturned or not, it was stupid expensive and the laws are still not fantastic. How can a majority of photographers afford this? 


Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

11 months 2 weeks ago #602414 by garyrhook

Troponin wrote: Cariou v Prince and look at how much they spent on that case. Overturned or not, it was stupid expensive and the laws are still not fantastic. How can a majority of photographers afford this? 


I don't think any photographer sees that outcome of that one as reasonable in any way. We already know that there are idiot judges on benches (Virginia) and it's going to take time to sort things out. And yes, a big part of the problem is the cost of litigation.

I also don't think we can draw conclusions about copyright based on bad judicial decisions. That case you site is problematic, but it doesn't mean the laws are the problem. Dumb judges are a problem. As is electing them, IMO, FWIW.

Affordability is an issue. That's why we need to support organizations like the Copyright Alliance, where work can be carried out to try to rectify these problems, and educate the public on the value of copyright (and oppose the tech companies that promulgate lies and misinformation in order to abuse creators for their own ends).

I remain hopeful.


Photo Comments
The following user(s) said Thank You: Troponin

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

802.3K

205K

1.62M

  • Facebook

    802,251 / Likes

  • Twitter

    205,000 / Followers

  • Google+

    1,620,816 / Followers

Latest Reviews

In this Fujifilm X100F review, learn about its essential features and specs, its pros and cons, and where you can pick one up for a great price.

Aug 16, 2019

The Nikon D500 might be several years old, but it's still a highly capable camera. In this Nikon D500 review, learn why it's still a good investment in 2019.

Aug 16, 2019

In this Nikon Z 14-30mm f/4 S review, learn about its specs, features, build quality, handling, price, and more.

Aug 13, 2019

The Fujifilm X-T2 might be three years old, but it's still a highly capable camera with specs and features that will suit just about any photographer in 2019.

Aug 12, 2019
Get 600+ Pro photo lessons for $1

Forum Top Posters

Latest Articles

With a big budget, there's no end to what you can give your favorite photographer this holiday season. See what some of the best gifts for photographers under $2,500 are in 2019!

Aug 20, 2019

Photography clients can be hard to find and even harder to keep, but with these photography business tips, you'll learn how to retain clients for the long-term.

Aug 20, 2019

Though being a new photographer means you probably have a ton of questions, there are some beginner photography questions that professionals are tired of hearing.

Aug 19, 2019

Using a vintage lens with a modern camera is a fun exercise, and can teach you a lot. But before you buy a vintage lens, be sure you know what you're getting yourself into...

Aug 19, 2019

Photo by Jakob Owens on Unsplash Joshua Rosenthal makes a living from taking pictures of strangers in public, legally. Under...

Aug 18, 2019

By Teichnor Bros., Boston - eBayfrontback, Public Domain "It wasn't the first time he utilized a couple of bottles of scotch to get into an area that...

Aug 18, 2019

Photo by Jesse Mills on Unsplash It is easy for us to forget that 9/11 is still claiming lives almost 2 decades later. It is...

Aug 17, 2019

In this Fujifilm X100F review, learn about its essential features and specs, its pros and cons, and where you can pick one up for a great price.

Aug 16, 2019