Copyright protection

[Sam Lightman]

I note that some years ago there was some discussion about watermarks as a means of protecting one's work from unauthorized reproduction. Since Gregg just sent around an email indicating that submitting work to Tallenge would result in giving up all rights to the work, I have looked at the places to which I have submitted work. The Los Angeles Center for Digital Art uses the following statement, and I would recommend we add it to our home page:

Works of individual artists remain the intellectual property and are copyrighted by their respective authors. No unauthorized reproduction, all rights reserved.

Simple, clear and straightforward. Doesn't mean you can stop anyone from using your work it they think they can get away with it, but it should at least serve as fair warning and discourage the vast majority.

Mind you, I did find something of mine on the Turkish Pinterest page last week...

[Curt Firestone]

Sam, I find your post confusing.

1. Who is Gregg? 

2. What is Tallenge?

3. I was not at the last meeting when the club adopted and approved the wordage for the home page. This issue has been discussed and massaged for over six months coming to the current resolution.  Was you suggestion discused at the meeting or is this a new proposal?

4. Have you read the Canadian Copyright Modernization Act passed in 2012?

5. Our research told us that the laws of the USA are different than the laws of Canada.  The Los Angeles Center being in the USA is not subject to the the Canadian Copyright Modernization Act passed in 2012.

I toss this ball back to you.  

Curt

[Sam Lightman]

1. Who is Gregg?

Gregg Klassen, who sent an email out to the club. You must have received it, no? 

2. What is Tallenge?

A scam, purporting to be an invitation to submit work for exhibition, but really looking for free images.

3. I was not at the last meeting when the club adopted and approved the wordage for the home page. This issue has been discussed and massaged for over six months coming to the current resolution.  Was you suggestion discused at the meeting or is this a new proposal?

A new proposal, not the issue about subjects' right to privacy versus fair use. The consensus about fair use brought about the disclaimer. But I don't see any copyright protection for the users of our site. Maybe I missed it somewhere?

4. Have you read the Canadian Copyright Modernization Act passed in 2012?

No, but I'd love to know more about it if you have. Even if it covers us, I still think it would be useful to add this simple little line to our home page as a reminder that we are not supplying free images to anyone who wants them.

5. Our research told us that the laws of the USA are different than the laws of Canada.  The Los Angeles Center being in the USA is not subject to the the Canadian Copyright Modernization Act passed in 2012.

Intellectual property rights is a hot topic all over the world right now. Asserting your exclusive right to the reproduction of your work strikes me as simply prudent, irrespective of its venue. You gotta problem wid dat?

[Wendy Rosier]

Wading in here folks....I =just had to get wording changed on a Licensing agreement for the mentor program....the following is what I wrote and links to articles and the actual bill itself as well as a summary of that - The summary is more informative than the bill itself because the section that limited out copyrights - Section 7 has been repealed...

                          **************************************************

Canadian Copyright Modernization Act - passed in November 2013 - gives the photographer the copyright to all their images even if they are commissioned. The photographer can license the use of their image to anyone they choose for any length of time but they always retain the copyright. http://www.popphoto.com/.../canadian-photographers-now...

Canadian Photographers Now Own Copyright to All Their Images — Comm...

www.popphoto.com

A new Canadian law means that photographers retain full rights to their images, even if they are commissioned

 

 

This is Bill C-11

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E...

This is a Summary of Bill C-11

http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_l...

This is the Specific area of Concern to Photographers

http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_l...

2 Description and Analysis

The following section provides a summary overview of selected provisions contained in Bill C-11, organized in accordance with the structure of the Copyright Act.

2.1 Interpretation (Clause 3)

Clause 3 of the bill adds a new subsection to section 2.4 of the Act, clarifying that the making available of a work or other subject matter to the public at a place and time chosen by the public by means of telecommunication is included within the meaning of “communication of a work or other subject-matter to the public by telecommunication” (see more particularly clauses 9 and 11).

2.2 Part I of the Act: Copyright and Moral Rights in Works (Clauses 6 and 7)

2.2.1 Photographs

Clause 6 of the bill repeals section 10 of the Act (term of copyright for photographs).

Clause 7 of the bill repeals subsection 13(2) of the Act (ownership of copyright for commissioned photographs). The bill seeks to make the photographer or painter the owner of copyright in photographs or portraits that have been commissioned, thereby bringing the ownership of copyright in photographs in line with other works. Presently, the person who commissions a photograph or portrait, rather than the photographer, is deemed to be the first owner of the copyright. Photographers, therefore, have had to rely on contractual arrangements to obtain rights to reproduce their photographs. The bill gives the person who commissioned the photograph or portrait limited rights to use it for personal or non-commercial use without the photographer or artist’s permission, subject to any contract that specifies otherwise.50

[Patricia Page]

I think Gregg sent an email to those in the seminar series

[Doug McMillin]

Yes, Patricia is correct and Gregg asked me to post it on the club site, which I did HERE