[Dr_C]

Like many users I share a lot of images of technical slotcar projects on this forum. Could some kind member of the admin/mods team please point me to the copyright rules which VerticalScope Inc applies to this site? I am guessing the creator of the image owns the copyright in the first instance. Does the user transfer/novate that copyright ownership to VerticalScope Inc at the point of uploading the image? or is VerticalScope granted unlimited rights to use copyrighted material? Then when it comes to other users downloading those same images, am I correct in understanding that users may only use those images for personal use i.e. not for commercial use?

I realise all of this stuff can be complicated, however is there an idiots introductory guide I could take a look at please which explains the above? a link would be very helpful please?

Many thanks,

c

 

[Dr_C]

Sorry I should have said... the question is not super-urgent. A response in January would be absolutely fine... I just wanted to ask the question before I forget.

c

 

[scuderia_turini]

Hello Dr_C, There is a copyright statement at the very bottom of the screen. Have to say its gobble-de-**** to me.

Leo

 

[Dr_C]

Thanks Leo, yes, that is why I asked about an idiots guide... and yes - clearly I meet that description for not asking earlier. Unless I am mistaken the material at the bottom of the page looks more like escalation procedures if you are unhappy rather than a clear setting out of legal rights/responsibilities etc. I am looking for the latter.

c

 

[Dopamine]

You're wasting your time worrying about copyright for images posted on the internet. You can have all the legal protection that you want, but unless you have an army of people to enforce it or nothing else to do with your time, plus a massive bank balance with which to fight disputed claims, you'll never win. You'll just become paranoid and spend way too much time searching for unauthorised use of your images. I speak from experience.

The industry that has suffered most from copyright abuse is the porn industry. I'm retired from it now, but spent many years earning a lot of money from it (or rather, my wife did. She was the model, I was merely the guy responsible for administering the business, producing some of the content and maintaining her website.) In common with many performers, we went from earning five-figure sums a month to a fraction of that, mainly driven by the rise of image and video piracy. We were one of roughly 800 contractors working for an American parent company which estimated its losses due to piracy to be in excess of $2 million a month. Despite a couple of legal successes against the biggest pirates, they eventually gave up the fight.

Our site reached a stage where within 24 hours of new content being uploaded to it, all of it was freely available on the pirate sites. In the case of the porn industry, one that no government has been willing to help protect - hardly surprising, given the tabloid headlines that would inevitably follow - performers have had to evolve and now live-camming is the big money maker, being very hard to pirate.

My advice to you: if your images are good enough for someone to want to copy, treat it as a compliment rather than be annoyed about it. If you're really bothered about retaining control over them, don't publish them on the internet.

 

[portals999]

Copyright automatically belongs to the creator of the work, (the author), i.e. the person making the post.

Unless as part of the act of posting the author agrees to hand over copyright to their work, the forum does not own copyright to the posts - ergo they are not the copyright owner and have no grounds to object.

If as part of the act of posting the author agrees to hand over copyright to their work, there is a issue.

e.g. check the terms of use of the forum:

Last revised: January, 2002
Reserved Rights and Grant of Limited License
Copyright (c) 2000, 2001 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.

VerticalScope Inc. ("VerticalScope") either owns the intellectual property rights, including copyright, or has acquired the necessary licences therein, in and to the information, including, without limitation, all text, HTML code, multimedia clips, images, graphics, icons, Java code, and the selection and arrangement of the contents of the Site (collectively the "Information"). The User is granted a limited, non-exclusive license to display the Information and print short extracts of the Information for the User's own personal use only, provided the Information is not modified, identifies the source, bears VerticalScope's copyright notice as it appears above, and provided further that the User shall be fully responsible for any consequences resulting from such use. Any other use of the Information is strictly prohibited. None of the Information may be otherwise reproduced, republished or re-disseminated, in whole or in part, in any manner or form without the prior written consent of VerticalScope.

 

[Dr_C]

Thanks - I for wouldnt post images with any hope of seeking protection through the courts for precisely the reasons mentioned. However, I would like to understand the legal implications when I press the image upload button. What authorities/rights am I passing to whom? That must be written down somewhere, surely?

c

 

[Dr_C]

Thanks Portals999 - very kind of you to track this down. As I read the text it appears to describe what permissions VerticalScope will have obtained with respect to copyright/licence from the submitter of content. It also explains limitations on what other users may do with forum content. What is missing for me is any statement of whether the submitter of content is transferring IP ownership or granting licence to VerticalScope at the point they upload content. I would like to see it explained in a way that simple hobbyists like me can understand.

c

 

[Dopamine]

If it weren't for the date range not including anything after 2012, I think the license info at the bottom of the screen would mean that you retain copyright of your images. As it is, the 2003-2012 bit leaves it open to question. I suspect that the date ends at 2012 only because nobody has troubled to amend it, rather than VS assuming control of images. However, without asking them, it's not possible to be certain.

It may be that a moderator has access to that part of the board and is able to change it to 2020. Certainly, before Jason left to set up the rival slot car forum, he used to change the appearance of the board from time to time, so maybe it is within the power of a moderator to do so.

 

[RikoRocket]

Hi Dopamine, I've asked, I suspect it is buried in the VS software.

 

[RikoRocket]

VS requested to update.

 

[Drifter2]

You're wasting your time worrying about copyright for images posted on the internet. You can have all the legal protection that you want, but unless you have an army of people to enforce it or nothing else to do with your time, plus a massive bank balance with which to fight disputed claims, you'll never win. You'll just become paranoid and spend way too much time searching for unauthorised use of your images. I speak from experience.

The industry that has suffered most from copyright abuse is the porn industry. I'm retired from it now, but spent many years earning a lot of money from it (or rather, my wife did. She was the model, I was merely the guy responsible for administering the business, producing some of the content and maintaining her website.) In common with many performers, we went from earning five-figure sums a month to a fraction of that, mainly driven by the rise of image and video piracy. We were one of roughly 800 contractors working for an American parent company which estimated its losses due to piracy to be in excess of $2 million a month. Despite a couple of legal successes against the biggest pirates, they eventually gave up the fight.

Our site reached a stage where within 24 hours of new content being uploaded to it, all of it was freely available on the pirate sites. In the case of the porn industry, one that no government has been willing to help protect - hardly surprising, given the tabloid headlines that would inevitably follow - performers have had to evolve and now live-camming is the big money maker, being very hard to pirate.

My advice to you: if your images are good enough for someone to want to copy, treat it as a compliment rather than be annoyed about it. If you're really bothered about retaining control over them, don't publish them on the internet.

That's really interesting, I always wondered how that industry survived with all the pirating.

It seems once something is on the internet, it's open season. "You can't put the genie back in the bottle."

 

[stumbley]

Some sites/individuals have tags on their images that can inform them that the image is being used. You will get a sometimes nice, mostly nasty e-mail informing you that you are using intellectual property without proper authorization and that legal action might be taken if not removed. Whether or not these individuals will take the time to proceed with said action is open to debate...

 

[slotterkeith]

That's really interesting, I always wondered how that industry survived with all the pirating.

It seems once something is on the internet, it's open season. "You can't put the genie back in the bottle."

Not necessarily:

I was not involved in porn as above, but in the photography profession a routine approach is as follows:

As copyright owner: (In the UK, re. Copyright Designs & Patents Act 1988 if unsure).

1) Take a dated screen shot of your image in the violation context.

2) Inform infringer of breach (a named individual where possible), and that your usual reproduction fee of x£ per day is applicable and will be invoiced from one week of todays communication, for that specified use (medium, context, size).

3) Keep screenshots and invoice in the usual manner. (Statements and SCCourt claims where necessary).

This is almost always sufficient to secure prompt removal of your copyrighted images from illegal use by third parties.

Two further points - not intended as legal advice.

1) You cannot invoice retrospectively.

2) It is only worth taking legal action (other than Small Claims on unpaid accounts), if you can sue for damages resulting directly from the infringement.

I offer this rough and ready guide as a retired, freelance editorial photographer of almost forty years standing.

 

[GregK]

So if I post an image or details on this Forum of some work that I have done ...... does VS own the copyright to the intellectual property as well ......

 

[Slotspeed]

I am not sure of what the use of the image was that brought this question or concern out into the open, but maybe judicious use of a watermark might prevent unwanted re-use of a members images. I note that in some cases users are already savvy with covering up or blurring some unique details of designs etc but maybe a watermark and a "(c) 2020 Dr_C not to be re-used without permission" for instance might prevent unwanted re-use.

I think Greg asks a fair question in post #15 that many forum users may be interested to know. I suspect not (I am no lawyer) but what did we all sign in the fineprint? (I don't actually remember)

 

[slotterkeith]

So if I post an image or details on this Forum of some work that I have done .......... does VS own to copyright to the intellectual property as well ...... :question:

Greg.

NO - unless you have agreed to hand it over.

If you create an image / article, you automatically own its copyright, it is your intellectual property, (unless you created it under the employment of someone). portals999 has hit the nail on the head.

As I understand it, VS could lay claim to the copyright of the "layout of the page" we see the information presented on in the forum... but not your creation as such.

 

[GregK]

maybe a watermark and a "(c) 2020 Dr_C not to be re-used without permission" for instance might prevent unwanted re-use.

Are you telling me that he has that much ownership of the digital forums as that ........

?

Excuse me whilst I self-flagellate .... Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxi culpa ........

 

[Slotspeed]

Are you telling me that he has that much ownership of the digital forums as that ........

?

Excuse me whilst I self-flagellate .... Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxi culpa ........

What are you getting at Greg.

I am offering a suggestion to fellow forum members to prevent unwanted re-use of their own work.

If you look at photographic works say of racing cars on social media you will see a lot of images posted by photographers with watermarks almost exactly as per my suggestion. I never said anything about ownership of digital forums.

Perhaps you are reading too much into things.

Steve.

(edit: added quote)

 

[Jeepster]

Copyright today is a bit of a minefield. People take and use music, images and the written word from the Internet with impunity and without a second thought. Intellectual property is nigh on impossible to protect for the average person, and even if you discover or track down misuse it is not worth the time and cost of legal action. The Internet is effectively copy machine!

I composed quite a lot of music up until around 2005, and I played in a band as well as doing solo stints. When my/our music was online by way of promotion there was nothing to stop anyone lifting it. I can name numerous music websites that store music for downloading that is the intellectiual property of hundreds of well known artistes and bands. It's the same with images - photographs and modern works of art are easy to replicate given a high resolution image online.

Personally I'm not bothered about any infringement of my photos and creative text in various genres and guises online. It's just not worth bothering with. I have seen one of my photos elsewhere (without a credit) but so what? Some years back one of my early websites published a fair bit of creative writing, which was lifted here and there. I just shrug. Is someone going to pay me money? No. It would only be different if my own work was being published in one form or another, when I'd be contacting the printer/publisher and have it closed off with the threat of action.

I ask, is anyone really that bothered about a photo they've put online being used elsewhere among the billions of other images around the world? Not me!

Just my 5 cents. Have a nice day!