Copyright Infringement Question (Flickr account)
Discussion
I have a flickr account which is in regular use. All of my photos are marked copyright by default and I do not use any of the distribution agreements that are in place on flickr. Over the last year I've had a few enquiries from people who have wanted to use one or two of my pictures. Most recently a UK publisher expressed an interest in some of my shots and these now feature on the front and back covers of a hardback book about a particular marque of car. 
Whilst I sometimes see my photos reposted on tumblr, I usually don't mind too much as long as there is attribution and a link back to my flickr page. I am after all no pro, and we're not talking huge volumes by any stretch.
So, against that background, it recently came to my attention that an internet based company in the US has nicked half a dozen of my photos, saved them on their own servers, and republished them on a blog that is linked into both their Facebook page and their commerce page. The purpose of their blog and Facebook pages appears to be to drum up interest in the service that they are selling (in relation to which my pictures are loosely connected) and direct people to their main website.
The blog page with my images on it states that it appears "courtesy of" the main commercial company. The Facebook entry which contains one of my photos and links to the blog entry with my pics on it has several thousand "likes" and has been shared several thousand times with the company blogsite credited.
The main company website (linked from the blog and Facebook) has a section which states that the business is a highly popular website that focuses on buying and selling the particular commodity/service in question and receives millions of visits every year with traffic coming from search engines, social networks, their own newsletters and blogs. It then uses that statement to justify a table of pricing for advertising on the site, claiming that advertisers can thereby tap into their huge audience.
When this first came to my attention, and before I'd looked into the background company, I sent a message to the author of the blog post asking that the photos be linked back to my flickr account and that I be attributed in the article. I heard nothing, and all of the pictures on the blog and Facebook remain in place.
There have recently seen a number of articles about bloggers being sued for copyright infringement in the US. see for example: http://www.blogher.com/bloggers-beware-you-can-get...
I've read another interesting article about a blogger who had to cough up $3000 for reproducing someone else's picture. http://www.contentfac.com/copyright-infringement-p...
I reckon that if I were I inclined to pursue it, I would have a pretty good case. One of the images that has been used is the same one that has now been licensed to appear on the cover of the book I mentioned above.
So, the question I lay open to the PH photo group floor is whether any of you have ever bothered pursuing a claim like this with a company based abroad, how easy it was and whether you might have any helpful advice? I'm not really looking for legal advice per se, more practical advice on the ease of proceeding.
Cheers
Whilst I sometimes see my photos reposted on tumblr, I usually don't mind too much as long as there is attribution and a link back to my flickr page. I am after all no pro, and we're not talking huge volumes by any stretch.
So, against that background, it recently came to my attention that an internet based company in the US has nicked half a dozen of my photos, saved them on their own servers, and republished them on a blog that is linked into both their Facebook page and their commerce page. The purpose of their blog and Facebook pages appears to be to drum up interest in the service that they are selling (in relation to which my pictures are loosely connected) and direct people to their main website.
The blog page with my images on it states that it appears "courtesy of" the main commercial company. The Facebook entry which contains one of my photos and links to the blog entry with my pics on it has several thousand "likes" and has been shared several thousand times with the company blogsite credited.
The main company website (linked from the blog and Facebook) has a section which states that the business is a highly popular website that focuses on buying and selling the particular commodity/service in question and receives millions of visits every year with traffic coming from search engines, social networks, their own newsletters and blogs. It then uses that statement to justify a table of pricing for advertising on the site, claiming that advertisers can thereby tap into their huge audience.
When this first came to my attention, and before I'd looked into the background company, I sent a message to the author of the blog post asking that the photos be linked back to my flickr account and that I be attributed in the article. I heard nothing, and all of the pictures on the blog and Facebook remain in place.
There have recently seen a number of articles about bloggers being sued for copyright infringement in the US. see for example: http://www.blogher.com/bloggers-beware-you-can-get...
I've read another interesting article about a blogger who had to cough up $3000 for reproducing someone else's picture. http://www.contentfac.com/copyright-infringement-p...
I reckon that if I were I inclined to pursue it, I would have a pretty good case. One of the images that has been used is the same one that has now been licensed to appear on the cover of the book I mentioned above.
So, the question I lay open to the PH photo group floor is whether any of you have ever bothered pursuing a claim like this with a company based abroad, how easy it was and whether you might have any helpful advice? I'm not really looking for legal advice per se, more practical advice on the ease of proceeding.
Cheers
Edited by CY88 on Friday 14th February 02:30
After doing a bit more research I see that the statutory damages together with payment of attorneys fees) are only available if your work has been pre-registered with the US copyright office in Washington prior to the infringement taking place. Out of the question in my case then 
The article below still seems to suggest that foreigners can mount a case though without relying on statutory damages though?
http://www.newcomb-law.com/intellectual-property/2...
Still interested in hearing anyone's experience.
Cheers, CY88
The article below still seems to suggest that foreigners can mount a case though without relying on statutory damages though?
http://www.newcomb-law.com/intellectual-property/2...
Still interested in hearing anyone's experience.
Cheers, CY88
Edited by CY88 on Friday 14th February 14:01
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff