1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Copyright: What you need to know!

Discussion in 'Legal Issues' started by Crusader, Jan 6, 2007.

  1. marketjunction

    marketjunction Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,779
    Likes Received:
    187
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    183
    #21
    NOLO books are usually pretty solid for the layman.
     
    marketjunction, Jan 15, 2007 IP
  2. skunker

    skunker Guest

    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #22
    It's a great book, I have it, but I am still talking to my copyright attorney tomorrow! I am going to ask him about selling public domain photos on my website in regards to photos that happen to contain some trademarks or famous people (etc. Depression era photos that show a shop in New York with coca cola logos on it, Babe Ruth, etc).

    I'll report back if there's any good info I can share.
     
    skunker, Jan 15, 2007 IP
  3. letsjoy

    letsjoy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    43
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    160
    #23
    nice info thanks
     
    letsjoy, Jan 15, 2007 IP
  4. marketjunction

    marketjunction Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,779
    Likes Received:
    187
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    183
    #24
    Sounds like a plan.
     
    marketjunction, Jan 15, 2007 IP
  5. Crusader

    Crusader Peon

    Messages:
    1,735
    Likes Received:
    104
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #25
    Site Feeds and Copyrights

    When considering integrating a site feed (RSS or otherwise) from another site into your own site you need to consider the copyright issues which may apply. The content of the feed is still considered copyrighted material, especially in the case where the feed contains the whole article/post.

    The primary purpose of a site feed is for the visitors of that site to be kept up to date on new additions to the site. In some cases the site owner will allow the feed to contain the whole article, instead of just a short introductory paragraph. In this way the site visitors can read the whole thing using their feed reader (instead of visiting the site).

    The secondary use of a site feed is syndication e.g. other sites can integrate the feed and that site's visitors will see a list of the newest articles added to the original site. These feeds normally contain a short paragraph showing what the story is about and then links to the original site.

    It has become popular for sites to integrate feeds from various other sites in order to boost their content and pages they can put Adsense advertising on. Many MFA sites use this technique to create pages containing only feeds and then generate income from the advertisements served on those pages. Using the feed in this way can be seen as a copyright infringement especially since you are profiting from the copyrighted work.

    Guidelines for using site feeds:
    • Obtain permission from the site owner before integrating the feed into your site. Explain to the site owner what you are planning to do with the feed and get their permission first (preferably in written form).
      Not all sites want their content syndicated. If you don't get permission prior to using the feed you can face a DMCA request or cease-and-desist letter from the copyright holders. CNN for example doesn't allow the syndication of their feeds.
    • Read and understand the terms of service as pertaining to the site feed (if any). It should describe how you can use the feed and the restrictions that apply. If no ToS is available, contact the site owner and discuss usage and gain permission.
    • Don't place adverts on pages containing feeds. Earning revenue from the content in the site feeds will most likely be frowned upon. If the site owner discovers that you are profiting from their work they are more likely to take further legal action.
    • Always link back to the original site.
    • Never post the complete article contained in the feed (unless you have explicit permission to do so). Even if it is available it's best to limit it to just the first paragraph, with a link back to the source.
     
    Crusader, Jan 27, 2007 IP
  6. Lord Matt

    Lord Matt Peon

    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #26
    While only public domain has no copyright restrictions there is a lot of material that can be used freely. The so called Copyleft material such as the license on the wikipedia or creative commons.
     
    Lord Matt, Feb 6, 2007 IP
  7. skunker

    skunker Guest

    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #27
    Public Domain suffers from RIGHT OF PRIVACY and TRADEMARK issues, so even they are not copyright free in all cases. For example, if there is an American Soldier standing in front of a Coca Cola sign during World War II, you can't use that image on advertisement without first getting Coca Cola's permission. Just one example.
     
    skunker, Feb 7, 2007 IP
  8. jdR!pper

    jdR!pper Peon

    Messages:
    4,974
    Likes Received:
    564
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #28
    This is a very really great post. I was just about to open a thread and ask something. Then I came across this thread. Nice one Crusader. :D

    --Joe
     
    jdR!pper, Feb 26, 2007 IP
    Lord Hades likes this.
  9. arie_ds

    arie_ds Peon

    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    5
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #29
    Wow!! Thanks for the info..

    Geezz.. I have to think more carefully before I publish my website whether or not complying with the law.

    BTW.. how about scholarship info? Usually the information is put on universities website, if we, say help them to distribute or promote through our website, that would be an advantage for them, don't you think?

    What is your opinion? Should we still obtain permission from related universities?

    Thanks
     
    arie_ds, Feb 28, 2007 IP
  10. Crusader

    Crusader Peon

    Messages:
    1,735
    Likes Received:
    104
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #30
    That would be the best practice. They might even provide you with more comprehensive info if you contact them.
     
    Crusader, Mar 1, 2007 IP
  11. Crusader

    Crusader Peon

    Messages:
    1,735
    Likes Received:
    104
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #31
    Linking to copyrighted material*

    Sites that link to copyrighted materials* being distributed illegally / pirated (such as MP3's, movies, software and TV episodes) can be held liable for copyright infringement and subsequently sued.

    This is known as contributory infringement, where the site owner is willfully linking to copyright material* in order for others to copy/pirate the material. If the site owner has advertising on the site this is compounded, because they are profiting from the infringement.

    A 2006 Australian case found the owner of a website providing links to MP3 files guilty of infringement. Similar cases have been tried in the US, so a legal precedent exist. This means that chances are that you could possibly be found guilty if your site does the same.

    If you are linking to something in order to allow other people to download/view/obtain something they would have had to normally pay for, then you are doing something illegal and could be held liable for damages. So unless you have thousands of dollars to spend on legal fees, a cadre of lawyers on retainer and the will to fight court cases, then you should definitely not link to copyrighted material being distributed illegally. Hiding behind the excuse that no files are being hosted on your site, won’t be any defense at all.

    It is best to err on the side of caution. If you are in doubt regarding the legality of incorporating something into your site, seek legal advice from a lawyer. Otherwise refrain from using something that could give rise to legal issues.

    Also see:
    Linking to copyrighted material unlawful
    Linking and the law
    Linking to infringing content is probably illegal

    *"Copyrighted material" here refers to material being distributed illegally. It doesn't imply that it is illegal to link to pages on other sites with legitimate content.
     
    Crusader, Mar 3, 2007 IP
    Qryztufre likes this.
  12. LeopardAt1

    LeopardAt1 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    126
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    135
    #32
    May I ask why are there hundreds of thousands of sites that copy infringe and get away with it?

    Lets say I wanted to make a unofficial celebrity web site for a upcoming actress. My site becomes well known for her fan base...and only helps her publicity as a star.

    Now my unofficial website will be gathering images across the internet...and perhaps ones I make myself.

    For example, is this a bad thing to do:
    I buy the dvd of a movie the actress stars in. I play the dvd on my computer, make screen shots, and post them on my unoffical website of the actress. Yes, I'm taking work from the movie, but I'm also producing it.....so is this considered wrong? And if it is, why do so many fan websites have this? The webmasters will for example, buy a magazine, find the celebrity, and scan the image and post it to their site. Why are so many sites getting away with this? Lets say they did this to three magazine images, are you saying the webmaster can be sued for 150,000 a image? What if the site is commercial but only probably generated, lets say, 10k in 2 years....really no money invovled to take to court?

    Or please answer this:
    Photographer A takes a picture of Celeb A,, publishes it and copyrights it.

    Website A, finds the picture, and posts it on their site.

    Celeb A, gives Website A the permission to use any pictures of the celeb.

    NOW, can Photographer A sue Website A for using his picture he took?


    I admit, this is a useful post, but after reading it, it upsetted me a lot.

    To a certain degree, taking copyrighted work is not too bad of a thing. If there are millionnnnnnnnns of sites out there violating copyright laws, as a webmaster of a site that doesn't generate great revenue, why should you worry to much?

    Take a look at this celeb site that takes photos across the web:
    http://www.hicelebs.com

    And read their disclaimer:
    http://www.hicelebs.com/disclaimer.html

    I think this site has been up for a good 2 years and nothing bad happend to them. They were not slapped with any 150,000 dollar per image fees....to me I just believe thats non-sense and webmasters who don't make lots of revenue will probably not have to worry about such a big fine. Again, good post, but this thread really scares people from violating lil copyright laws.

    Now if your a big time, (your site generates millions per yr, and you use illegaly copyrighted material...then thats another issue...because you can bet they will target you).
     
    LeopardAt1, Mar 17, 2007 IP
    Lord Hades likes this.
  13. Crusader

    Crusader Peon

    Messages:
    1,735
    Likes Received:
    104
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #33
    Just because there are thousands of other sites out there using the copyrighted images, it doesn't mean that it is legal for them to do so. All it will take is one copyright holder who is willing to take the necessary steps to protect their copyright to the fullest degree.

    Taking screenshots from a DVD can be viewed as creating a derivitave work, which is a copyright violation. In most cases fan sites "get away" with it because the celebs don't mind the extra publicity and they don't want to create a bad perception amongst their fans.

    However, it's not up to the celeb, but to the photographer if they are willing to take steps for copyright infringement, so it's best to use press release images from the celeb's official site/marketing department.

    The $150,000 fee is the maximum that can be awarded in a copyright case (under US Law). Parez Hilton was recently sued that amount for each of the images he used on his celeb site. The case is still pending. Obviously the amount that will be actually awarded will be determined by the courts.

    Yes, photographer A can sue Website A for using his picture. Website A did not obtain permission from the copyright holder to use the image. The copyright belongs to the photographer and not to the celeb.

    The disclaimer of that site wouldn't be of any use in legal case. They also have a totally misinformed concept of what public domain entails. Images that are available on the internet doesn't automatically become public domain images.

    My guess is that the site has just been quite lucky so far that they haven't yet come across a copyright holder trying to protect their copyright. There is no guarantee that they won't be sued in the future.

    You don't need to make millions. Just do a search for Getty Images and see the horror stories that emerge where they are charging usage fees of thousands of dollars to Bloggers and many small websites, for using copyrighted images.

    The point of this thread is to show the possible consequences if you are violating copyrights and make people aware of the facts. You wouldn't want someone to steal your work, so why do you find it acceptable to do so with someone else's work?

    If you do decide to use copyrighted images without permission, it is up to you to do so, but then you will have to live with the possibility of someone sueing or demanding usage fees, or even getting your site taken down. To me that's not a risk I'm willing to take. I'd much rather get permission from the copyright holders and use images legitimately.
     
    Crusader, Mar 17, 2007 IP
  14. ing

    ing Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    500
    Likes Received:
    38
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    195
    #34
    Lots of great info in this thread. Images and RSS feeds have been mentioned, but what about HTML and CSS code?

    What if someone takes your html and stylesheet and uses it on their site.. and then they just change the actual text shown to suit their site/topic?

    Anyone know anything about this?
     
    ing, Mar 19, 2007 IP
  15. Crusader

    Crusader Peon

    Messages:
    1,735
    Likes Received:
    104
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #35
    You can't really copyright the code as such. However, the completed layout (with all parts thereof) can be copyrighted (and is automatically copyrighted upon completion, though you might want to have it officially copyrighted if you think you will ever want to sue someone for infringement :D ).

    This is a rather difficult one, since this is pretty much only applicable to a straight out copy of the layout itself. You can't copyright e.g a three-columned layout with a banner at the top, since that's pretty much the basic structure for most sites.

    So in order to proof copyright infringement you will have to have something unique to your design that's been directly copied.

    (This is my understanding of the HTML and CSS, Layout issues - although I haven't done much research regarding it. In general mostly images/text are constantly copied so cases involving that is better known and appears more often).
     
    Crusader, Mar 19, 2007 IP
    ing likes this.
  16. elena29

    elena29 Peon

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #36
    This is a masterpiece of a explanation on the topic of copyright. Thank you very much, I am passing you reputation plus!
     
    elena29, Jul 22, 2007 IP
  17. MrCat

    MrCat Banned

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #37
    Very useful info! Thumbs up! :)
     
    MrCat, Aug 7, 2007 IP
  18. chamatkaribaba

    chamatkaribaba Peon

    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #38
    When someone says copyright, one thing should surely come in mind is not "right to copy" but "prohibition to copy".

    You can copy from somewhere only when it expressly authorises you to copy; otherwise, in general evrything expressed on the medium; like writing will be copyrighted.
     
    chamatkaribaba, Aug 18, 2007 IP
  19. SeoVeteran33

    SeoVeteran33 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    390
    Likes Received:
    11
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #39
    Everyday YouTube clearly breaks copyright rules and nothing happens. I know they've been sued but have they paid even one cent?? NO.

    So if they can post full episodes of television shows, then we can all use and recycle the same video clips that every site has. I mean, seriously, most of the videos on the web are simply "unowned".

    As long as you don't go around showing videos that are clearly owned (tv episodes, full length football games, etc) you're never going to get in trouble.
     
    SeoVeteran33, Aug 21, 2007 IP
  20. Magicgfx

    Magicgfx Peon

    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #40
    great article, learned quite a bit of stuff from this..
     
    Magicgfx, Aug 24, 2007 IP