Copyright Infringement Reports (Review guidelines in post #1 before posting here)

[Bob Hartig]

The essence of copyright law, is the "RIGHT TO COPY" (thus copy-right {not copywrite as some people type it}).

Not to derail this thread, but to quickly clarify: copyright and copywriting are two entirely different things. The first involves right of ownership to a created work; the second involves writing copy--e.g. verbiage--for advertising, publicity, or journalism. Because the two spellings are pronounced exactly the same, they're often confused, much to my chagrin as a copywriter (not a copyrighter, which as far as I know isn't even a word).

David correctly identifies copyright as the word that applies to this thread.

This has been a public service announcement. We now return you to your regularly scheduled program.

 

[Jeremy Den Hartog]

To address the questions as to why I wrote the guide while not using my own photographs. I'll answer this question with another - why NOT use the photographs from public domain and stock photography sources if done legally (which I believe I tried to ensure to the greatest extent of my ability was done legally)? I already said that I had some photographs but really did not take or keep many of the photographs over the years (and the ones I had were really not of sufficient quality IMO for the guide I wanted to write). Furthermore, how many people here have good quality images of every type of tornado (wedge, rope, multiple vortex, land spout, etc)? Probably not a ton at least. Please don't take this as my trying to be defensive as I'm not - just simply trying to explain my logic. Maybe I should not have written the guide I suppose but figured it would be a useful tool for some people out there. If I had to do it all over again I would NOT have written this guide as its just caused a big mess and a heck of a lot of stress for myself...3 hours of sleep per night is starting to really wear on me due to the fact I'm almost constantly laying in bed at night trying to figure out what images are the problem, could I have possibly over looked something (I don't think I did but then again I'm not perfect) and ultimately what is going to happen in this matter...kind of sucks to say the least.

Still waiting to hear back from Lanny...

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

I believe you are mistaken unless I am reading the following wrong...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

Here is an example of one of the images I used. Look towards the bottom where it says 'licensing'. It says the image is in 'public domain'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F5_tornado_damage_example.jpg

Also, see the below link. This is another place where I got many of the images. It states they are public domain images.
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/torscans.htm

Haven't gotten to the end of the thread yet; I have no idea how this turned out. However, that said, there is a reason why publishers license imagery from agencies that indemnify their clients against copyright issues, and I think you've just discovered it. Doesn't really matter if you purchased the image from an agency or grabbed an image that claims to be public domain; if the agency doesn't have the authority to license the image or the image isn't actually public domain, you could be running into some serious issues.

I don't talk about it too much but I pursue copyright infringements all the time. Generally, it's best not to talk publicly about any infringement you find; it weakens your legal position. It's much safer to let the attorney handle it.

 

[Steve Miller]

Jeremy, are you in Public Relations by chance?
Ryan said:

I don't talk about it too much but I pursue copyright infringements all the time. Generally, it's best not to talk publicly about any infringement you find; it weakens your legal position. It's much safer to let the attorney handle it.

Perhaps this is why Lanny has ceased talking about this in public forum...

 

[Jeremy Den Hartog]

Haven't gotten to the end of the thread yet; I have no idea how this turned out. However, that said, there is a reason why publishers license imagery from agencies that indemnify their clients against copyright issues, and I think you've just discovered it. Doesn't really matter if you purchased the image from an agency or grabbed an image that claims to be public domain; if the agency doesn't have the authority to license the image or the image isn't actually public domain, you could be running into some serious issues.

I don't talk about it too much but I pursue copyright infringements all the time. Generally, it's best not to talk publicly about any infringement you find; it weakens your legal position. It's much safer to let the attorney handle it.

I think I understand what you are saying. If I am, how is one to know what is actually copyrighted and which is not? To be honest, at this point I really kind of feel 'blindsided' by all of this. That being said, I will discontinue posting in this thread until I hear back from Lanny...

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

The problem I have - as a user of stock photography myself - is that what if someone else uploads your work to a stock photo company, and then I purchase it thinking it's legal? Of course I'd have to take the photo down once it's been found to be an illegal copy, but the true criminal is the one who uploaded it in the first place.

First off, I am not an attorney. Seek professional legal counsel for legal advice.

That said, you could still be in a lot of hot water, legally; much of it would depend on whether the agency you licensed the image from was willing to indemnify you. If they were, they'd handle the lawyering up you'd have to do. *edit* FWIW, this is very expensive. Expect to spend around $1K just to get an attorney to guide you to a four figure settlement. Expect ~ $40,000 in legal fees and court costs if you decide to take it to trial. That doesn't touch the legal fees of the person you infringed against (which often defendants are liable for) or the actual judgement itself, which can be in the five or even six figures range PER INFRINGEMENT.) You can't bankrupt out of a Federal judgement in many cases.*edit* Most likely the art owner would target the agency, since they have much deeper pockets than you do, though you never know. A good rule of thumb is that if you don't have any money or assets and never plan to have any money or assets for the rest of your life, you're safe to infringe copyright.

Copyright is a strict liability offense. Nothing needs to be proved other than that you were infringing; how you got the image and whether you thought you were violating law or not doesn't really matter in assessing guilt, though it can go a long way in determining damages.

Most copyright infringement issues (in which the images were registered before infringement) are settled long before filing suit, let alone going to trial. There is a reason for this. Anything that makes Fortune 500 companies prefer to settle out of court should give you pause, too. It is best to always be 100% sure you are not infringing on copyright. This isn't that hard to do; iStockPhoto, which sells very cheap (though usually very pedestrian) photos, will indemnify you as a customer against any copyright lawsuits. Why? Because they are damn careful to ensure that all images that are submitted to their service were created by the submitters. All the big agencies, as far as I know (Getty, Corbis, etc.) indemnify.

As has been noted in this thread, BigStockPhoto doesn't indemnify. If you use an image you purchased from them and it's infringing and the artist finds your infringement, you could be in an extremely exposed position. Hopefully, in such a situation, you have good liability insurance.

For artists, pursuing copyright infringements isn't actually terribly expensive, unless you go to trial, and even then the only huge expense is in terms of risk; i.e., the risk that you'll lose and get stuck paying for the whole trial. Many IP attorneys will handle infringement issues contingency (i.e., they front the up-front costs in exchange for a percentage of the settlement/judgement.) If you are the infringer, however, it's likely all going to be out of pocket until the issue is resolved, one way or another.

Again, I repeat: I'm a layman, not an attorney. Don't rely on me for legal advice. Seek professional legal representation to give you advice specific to your circumstances.

 

[Robert Dewey]

Good point Ryan... I guess it's worth checking into the TOS / legal agreements for stock photo companies.

 

[Jeremy Den Hartog]

Just an FYI, I have changed my mind as far as the guide goes. I had stated earlier in this thread that I would re-upload my guide as-is if I didn't hear back from Lanny letting me know which images were his. I am no longer planning to do that no matter what happens. I am not going to wait for Lanny to get around to telling me which images were the issue (I have PM'd him at least a couple times in the last couple days about which images they are not to mention however many times I asked the question throughout this thread with absolutely no response - at least not a response telling me which images are the issue). I am just going to replace ALL images by using images from those who offered to let me use their images and will also take this time to update the information in the guide. For those who offered, I will probably contact you in the coming weeks with what images I need and if anyone else is willing or interested in contributing in anyway to the project, let me know (yes, everyone will receive credit for their contributions and the guide will again be 100% free).

 

[David Drummond]

Jeremy, I'd be careful with that logo you have there too. While it's certainly creative and a nice takeoff on the MLB logo, that may be exactly how MLB might view it as well. Especially when the name of your group/website, the first two words are MAJOR LEAGUE. It's a cute takeoff concept, but I can see their lawyers having a field day with the similarities there, drawing corelations of profiting off of their logo and such, especially since you are selling merchandise with the logo on it. I wouldn't want to risk taking on the MLB lawyers if it were me. You might could mount a defense on parody or something, but I'm thinking you wouldn't want the spend the lawyer funds Ryan mentioned above to defend it?

I saw someone else using a Loony Tunes character in their storm chasing logo. That's one for sure right there just waiting to get sued by big corporate lawyers, and it was a direct ripoff.

 

[Jeremy Den Hartog]

Jeremy, I'd be careful with that logo you have there too. While it's certainly creative and a nice takeoff on the MLB logo, that may be exactly how MLB might view it as well. Especially when the name of your group/website, the first two words are MAJOR LEAGUE. It's a cute takeoff concept, but I can see their lawyers having a field day with the similarities there, drawing corelations of profiting off of their logo and such, especially since you are selling merchandise with the logo on it. I wouldn't want to risk taking on the MLB lawyers if it were me. You might could mount a defense on parody or something, but I'm thinking you wouldn't want the spend the lawyer funds Ryan mentioned above to defend it?

I saw someone else using a Loony Tunes character in their storm chasing logo. That's one for sure right there just waiting to get sued by big corporate lawyers, and it was a direct ripoff.

Thanks for the heads up David. My logo has now been altered (and I'm in the process of altering the other logos such as the one on my website)...

 

[Patrick Boomer]

Thread Rules

Stormtrack promotes the lawful use of photographs and videos by its members. If a user discoveres copyright infringement of any member's work, we ask that you please PM that user directly. If the pirated work encompasses multiple users, you may either PM every user seperately, or make a copyright infringement report within this thread. In the case that copyright infringement is suspected, but the work is unidentified, a post may also be made.

We ask that discussion in this thread be limited to identifying the copyrighted work.That means keep it on topic. No snark remarks or colorful comments. The subject matter in the thread is serious, and the discussions should be treated as such.

The offending images have still not been identified, yet accusations of theft continue outside this thread.
How does that work?
Lets see what the stink is about Lanny, tell us which images are yours, a link to where they could have been stolen from would be nice too.

 

[john.sibley]

Heads up to all: If you sell video to Weather Channel, NBC most likely will send it down the network stream to the affiliates. I've seen some TWC video on my local affiliate in the last several days that is of the chaser/cellphone type.

 

[Steve Miller]

The offending images have still not been identified, yet accusations of theft continue outside this thread.
How does that work?
Lets see what the stink is about Lanny, tell us which images are yours, a link to where they could have been stolen from would be nice too.

Because there is legal involved, the latest copyright issue will probably not come to light on this public thread.

 

[Jeremy Den Hartog]

Lanny has contacted me via PM and stated that if I apologize and tell the truth publicly (in both threads apparently - the 'my logo' one and this one), he will not seek legal action in regards to this issue. So here goes.

First off Lanny, I am truly sorry this happened. I realize you sell your images/videos for at least part of your income so you take these kinds of things very seriously. In no way when I wrote my guide did I intend to 'wrong' anyone and tried to be very thorough to ensure I did not do so.

Secondly, here is the truth. I should note that this is the part Lanny is probably not going to like (he wants me to admit to stealing his images - which I did not do and consequently will not admit to or apologize for). As I have stated numerous times I used images from Wikipedia, public domain sources and a royalty free stock photography site (bigstockphoto.com). However, as far as where the images in question have come from I can't say. This is because Lanny refuses to tell me which images are the issue (apparently because his attorney informed him not to) which has made it pretty much impossible to defend myself against his accusations. However, below is a list of the images I used in my guide and where exactly they came from. Please note, as I have already stated in one of the threads here, I do not know with 100% certainty where one of the images I used came from. I am almost certain it came from bigstockphoto as well but it appears its no longer available there so I can't prove this (please remember the guide was written at the end of 2006). However, Lanny has already stated that this is not either one of the images he is referring to (he said he believes its from Eric Nguyen - which it may or may not be I have no idea and is likely an image that also came from bigstockphoto).

Anyhow, here is the list of images and where I got them from:

- Image on the cover: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/7091
- First image found on page 4: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/420071
- First image found on page 8: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/648018
- First image found at the bottom of page 9: http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/htmls/wea00065.htm
- First image found on page 10: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GoldenMedows.jpg
- Second image found on page 10: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/877552
- Last image found on page 10: http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/htmls/wea00044.htm
- First image found on page 11: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/257434
- Second image found on page 11: http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/htmls/wea00083.htm
- third image found on page 11: http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/htmls/nssl0132.htm
- fourth image found on page 11: http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/htmls/nssl0108.htm
- Last image found on page 11: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro...nder-cloud.jpg
- First image found on page 12: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/7090
- First image found on page 13: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/7091
- First image found on page 14: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/647944
- Second image found on page 14: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/116700
- First image found on page 15: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/269216
- First image found on page 16: http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/htmls/nssl0001.htm
- First image found on page 18: This is the image I'm unsure of.
- Second image found on page 18: Picture I took myself
- First image found on page 20: http://www.spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/binger.jpg
- Second image found on page 20: http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/htmls/nssl0066.htm
- Third image found on page 20: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pa...ntornadoes.jpg
- Fourth image found on page 20: http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/htmls/nssl0056.htm
- Fifth image found on page 20: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GID_Landspout.jpg
- Last image found on page 20: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Trombe.jpg
- First image found on page 23: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F5...ge_example.jpg
- First image found on page 24: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/242455

Thats it, everything else are charts or radar images. For those of you who downloaded my free guide before it was removed feel free to match them up and see for yourself that I'm not lying to Lanny.

Anyhow, there really isn't much more to be said. If Lanny feels this still needs to go to court then so be it. I will say though that if it does go to court my family and I are pretty much screwed. We are barely getting by financially the way it is so having to hire a lawyer, etc would likely mean we would have to declare bankruptcy and maybe lose our house. Point being, I am not taking these accusations lightly and I'm trying to do everything I can to correct the issue...

 

[Clarence Bennett]

I may get slapped for saying it, but I think this whole thing is just pure horse****. Most good attorney's are smart enough to only go for deep pockets in cases like this, yet we sit here and beat the **** out of a kid from MN. Unbelievable.