Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Using Unlicensed Photos On Websites
For the last six months, I have been getting no less than three phone calls or e-mails a week from clients who have gotten letters from photographers (or their representatives) seeking licensing fees for photos that have been posted without permission. These are clients who run legitimate businesses with robust websites, and many of the photos in question have been on their websites without incident for years.
For a long time people have generally felt it appropriate to go onto various image search engines, find a photo for a newsletter, website or whatever, and then cut and paste it into their publication or website.'This trend did not generally apply to hard copy publications, because when you cut and paste something from the Internet, the quality is not sufficient to reproduce well in hard copy ' it pixilates and becomes distorted. However, due to the limited resolution of computer monitors, a cut-and-pasted image looks perfectly fine when copied to a website.'As a result, based on either ignorance of copyright law, a belief in the myth of “it is on the Internet so I can use it,” or simply the calculation that the risk of getting caught was minimal, it is likely that hundreds of thousands of images have been cut and pasted, without license, into third-party websites and online publications.
One of the reasons this was so easy to get away with in the past was that there was no effective way for photographers to find unlicensed uses of their work. When you went onto the various search engines' image sections, what they were doing was searching for text surrounding the pictures and offering up all sorts of images ' both related and not.'A search of 'Ronald Reagan' would result in pictures of Ronald Reagan, The Ronald Reagan Building, Ronald Reagan Airport, Ronald Reagan Highway, etc.'
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?