this is the question I keep asking myself again and again ,each and every time I consider adding new content to my website, or using some images from the internet. what are the borders for what is right and what is wrong in the online-marketing business ? does anyone here knows of some good lawyers in the subject ? I need to know if my content is original enough, or is it too similar to other website’s content. I need to know if I can use certain images on my website. I need to know if my sales letter / content /design of my website is written/designed in a way that is not misleading. I need to know How can I write a good “disclaimer†and other legal protecting material – to protect me against potential lawsuits ? I will appreciate every comment. If there are good lawyers I can talk to – this would be great !! I think this thread can help us all avoid tragic mistakes and keep us on the safe side more often than not.
If you're worried about content being "original enough", then it's not. Don't rewrite other people's work, assuming you'll hit the "magic percentage" of change to make it not infringing on their rights... I don't believe an official amount has ever been set by the courts anyway (and that would depend also on where you live). Don't use images without permission... simple enough concept. If you want to know if you can use images from an image site, read their terms of service. Rules vary site by site. Just understand that "royalty free" doesn't mean "free". Show your sales letter to people and let them tell you if it's misleading. No one can answer that without seeing it. A disclaimer also depends on the content. A site dealing with health issues would need a different disclaimer than one dealing with tech support issues or legal issues, just as an example. Jenn
Hello Jenn, Thank you for your reply. What about symbols ? like the US flag, Symbols & flags of the US State's etc.. Do you think I need permission for those also ? Thanks
That depends. If you get the photos from a government site, you probably won't have a problem (although you still need to check their terms). But if someone takes a photo of a flag, they still have the copyright on that particular photo, so you can't use it without their permission. Jenn
hmm! let's say i post several of my pictures and someone takes it! So I find out and tell him/her to take them off. On what I will probably get! Get the grrrr grr whatever etc. So my actions?
If someone steals your pictures, and you're the copyright owner, sent them an email first kindly asking them to remove your copyrighted work from their site. If they don't, send them a cease and desist notice. If they still don't remove them, your best bet would be to contact a lawyer.
The lawyer will go after anyone as long as you're paying them. What would they be "hunting" for? You said "if you found out"... implying you already would have found the copyright infringement. Hiring a lawyer is a last resort. Most people will pull it down with an email or a C&D anyway. Jenn
Interesting debate about ownership of electronic media. Like the picture ownership debate; Lets say someone takes a picture of a mountain. They do not own the mountain, they only just copied that image. Now this person displays this image electronically. Somebody else takes a takes a "snapshot"(aka copies the image) then does not this new image become the ownership of the person that has now taken the new image? Or is it who owns the mountain actually the owner of both copies of itself? Or is it that their are only two true objects that can be considered property, the mountain and the physical object of a picture that was the result. The electronic pulses have brought down our old definitions of ownership and property rights. Yes there are some that try and hold to old conventions of "mine mine mine" but these are starting to become a hard fight as well. Open source was not created out of a willingness to share it was born out of the realization that you cannot truly own (and control in actuality) what is not really tangible. More and more you see organizations offering to fight and protect peoples electronic "ownership rights". These, however, are nothing but the new snake oil salesman that are far to eager to take the money from the greedy. Good luck with your endeavor however.
Y'reckon. Some indigenous groups in NZ are claiming that images of their ancestors do infact belong to them as the image is their "taonga" or heritage. I imagine this goes on elsewhere. Cynicsm aside, your points are spot on.
And many building owners in the US of A are saying you may not photograph their buildings, because of copyright issues. The same with the Eiffel Tower - copyright owned by France. Crazy, huh?
Not really. In the case of architecture, it's a "design". Just because it's in a public place doesn't mean it should be allowed to be reproduced. Otherwise, you could make the same case for billboards, drafts of designs of automobiles, slogans or logos appearing on signage (w/ their trademarks), art on someone's clothing if they're walking around, etc. It's no different than writing, graphic design, or someone's code imo.
Depending on what your beliefs are... "God" or Apes" own everything man-made... and that includes "the stills"!