Category: Photography & the Law

  • No Expectation of Privacy in Public

    Smile, creeps! by S.mirk from Flickr (photo from the World Naked Bike Ride)
    Smile, creeps! by S.mirk from Flickr (photo from the World Naked Bike Ride)

    You have no expectation of privacy in anything you do or say in public.

    It used to be that if you did or said something in public that you later regretted, you only had to worry about the people who saw you repeating it to others. Now that everyone carries a smartphone, you should act as if someone is taking photos and shooting video of you all the time and that the footage is going to end up all over the internet or on the front page of the newspaper.

    That means if you say something racist, belittle at server for making a simple mistake, go to a strip club, or get drunk and make an ass out of yourself, you better be prepared for someone to capture that moment with their phone and share it with everyone on the internet. Once it goes out there, you have no control over who will see it.

    Carter Law Firm's Postcards
    Carter Law Firm’s Postcards

    When I give talks about social media law I tell people to assume that everything they post online will be seen by their best friend, their worst enemy, their boss, and their mother. If they don’t want one of those people to see something, then they shouldn’t post it. Likewise you should assume that these people will see the footage of anything you do in public.

    This rule also applies to situations where you’re in public and you don’t know that someone can see you. If you and your significant other decide to have sex in public – like at a park late at night or on the rooftop terrace of your apartment building – you’re chosing to have sex in plain view of the public. The fact that you didn’t think anyone was watching you does not give you an expectation of privacy.

    Some people may order you to stop filming them, including the police. If it’s a situation that is in plain view of the public, they don’t have the right to stop you. There may be issues if you’re stalking or harassing someone, but filming a person one time is unlikely to qualify. There is a law that says it’s illegal to refuse to follow a police officer’s order so in that situation you can decide to comply and go after them later for infringing on your rights or post the footage that you have with the story of them ordering you to stop filming. You could also risk getting arrested by refusing to comply and argue to the court that the officer didn’t have valid grounds for giving you that order.

    What about the wiretapping law? Arizona is a one party consent state where only one party to the conversation needs to consent to it being recorded. This prevents third parties from intercepting your phone calls or planting a bug near you to record your conversations. This law will protect you against someone spying on you, but if you’re speaking loudly enough for third parties to hear you, you have no expectation of privacy in your conversation.

    One right you do maintain is the right to commercialize your image. If someone takes a photo or video of you in public and is making money off of it, you might have a claim that they are commercializing your image without your consent.

    Because we live in a world where people are quick to record everything with their smartphones, think before you act. It’s best to be willing to own everything you do or say in public. That way if anyone ever confronts you with your past behavior in an attempt to humiliate you or tarnish your reputation, you can take the wind out of their sails by owning it. But you better be willing to own anything you do in every situation.

    For more information about privacy and the internet, please check out my book, The Legal Side of Blogging: How Not to get Sued, Fired, Arrested, or Killed or my video on this topic.

    You can also subscribe to the Carter Law Firm newsletter.
    You can connect with me on TwitterGoogle+FacebookYouTubeLinkedIn, or you can email me.
    Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.

  • FAQs about the Legalities of Social Media

    Carter Law Firm's Official Postcard - let me know if you want me to send you one.
    Carter Law Firm’s Official Postcard – Let me know if you want me to send you one.

    I had the pleasure of speaking at the Public Relations Society of America’s Western District Conference last weekend. I led two sessions: “So you want to do a flash mob” and “The Legal Side of Blogging: 10 Questions to Ask Before you Hit ‘Publish.’” Both sessions were great and I wanted to share some of the frequent questions I get when I talk about the legalities of social media.

    What should you do if you’re outsourcing your blog content?
    You need a kick ass contract that clearly states who owns the copyright in the content that is created. If the hiring company obtains copyright, does the blogger get permission to put a copy of the work in their portfolio to obtain other work? The contract should also state who is responsible if there are any problems related to the work (i.e., copyright infringement claim) or if there are any disputes related to the contract.

    What should you do if you want to use a photo from a company’s site, such as if want to write a positive review of their company?
    There’s a chance that using the photo could qualify as fair use; however it’s probably best to avoid the possibility of being hit with a copyright infringement claim by asking the company if you can use their photo. You never know who owns the rights to an image and if there are any restrictions related to using it.

    What’s the worst case scenario if you use an image from Google Images without verifying that it was available for use with a Creative Commons license or had been released to public domain?
    You could be sued for tens of thousands of dollars for copyright infringement. I always say that just because someone sues you that it doesn’t mean they’re going to win, but in this case, they might. You can still be sued and lose even if you didn’t mean any harm.

    I get permission to use every photo on my blogs or use photos that are available under Creative Commons licenses that allow me to modify and commercialize each image.

    What if you’ve been using Google Images or you haven’t kept track of what images you’re allowed to use?
    Probably no one wants to hear this, but I’d rip every image out of your site and start over, making sure that you own or have permission to use every image on your site.

    These are my rules of thumb when it comes to social media:

    • Assume everything you post online will be seen by your best friend, your worst enemy, your boss, and your mother. If you’re not ok with one of those people seeing what you want to say, don’t post it.
    • Don’t post anything online that you wouldn’t put on the front page of the newspaper.

    For more information about the legalities of social media, please check out my book The Legal Side of Blogging: How Not to get Sued, Fired, Arrested, or Killed.

    You can also subscribe to the Carter Law Firm newsletter.
    You can connect with me on TwitterGoogle+FacebookYouTubeLinkedIn, or you can email me.
    Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.

  • Sending a Bill When Someone Steals Your Work

    Mushroom? by Oslo in the Summertime from Flickr
    Mushroom? by Oslo in the Summertime from Flickr

    I’m a member of a Facebook group for people to discuss and share instances where other people use their work. Most of the members are nature photographers who do gorgeous work. Most of them have no desire to sue people who steal their work, but they would like to be compensated. And some of them are getting pissed when they find that someone has stolen their work and have started sending bills to people who use their work without permission.

    This isn’t a bad idea. I’ve had a friend get a bill in the mail when he used someone’s photograph without permission that he found via Google Images. You can view it here or below.

    When someone comes to me and wants to send a bill to anyone they discover is infringing on their copyrights, I suggest they add information to the website where they show their work about licensing terms and fees. This makes it more credible when the artist sends a bill that essentially says that by using a photograph, the infringer has agreed to pay the fee and abide by the license’s terms. As long as the infringer complies, they are no longer committing copyright infringement.

    The downside of this strategy is many people will ignore such a bill if they receive one. Then the question for the artist is “What’s next?” Do you sue them? Send a DMCA takedown notice to get the work taken off their site? Call them out publicly for using your work without permission? Do you drop the issue?

    My friend who got the bill for using an authorized image earlier this year got a bill from a company with a track record of suing people who don’t pay the bill and winning. In his case, he choices appeared to be pay the bill (or try to negotiate a lower price) or get sued. If you don’t follow up when people don’t pay the bill, it’s kind of like the photo radar tickets. If you get one in the mail, you can deal with it by paying the fine or going to traffic school or avoid service for four months until the court drops the charge.

    I’m not one to tell people what they should do, but I advise people to think their plan of action all the way through before selecting a course of action. If you need help deciding what’s the best strategy for protecting your copyrights, please contact a copyright attorney in your community.

    For more information about copyright and blogs, please check out my book The Legal Side of Blogging: How Not to get Sued, Fired, Arrested, or Killed.
    You can connect with me on TwitterGoogle+FacebookYouTubeLinkedIn, or you can email me.
    Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.

  • DMCA Abuse

    Copyright license choice by opensourceway from Flickr
    Copyright license choice by opensourceway from Flickr

    The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is part of the copyright law. Its purpose is to protect people who provide online forums but don’t control the content people post to them – like YouTube and Pinterest. If they receive a notice that material on their site is allegedly copyright infringement, they must remove it. This law gives content creators a way to react to copyright infringement when someone posts their work online without permission. Instead of sending a cease and desist letter to the person who stole their work, they bypass them and deal with the infringer’s webhost instead.

    Lately, I’ve seen a few instances where people have been improperly using the DMCA to get material removed from the internet that they don’t like. I’m starting to refer to these acts as DMCA abuse.

    1. Using the DMCA to address TM Infringement
    The DMCA should only be used for copyright issues – when you suspect someone is using your original content without your permission. Don’t use it to removed suspected instances of trademark infringement.

    In a recent incident, GoPro allegedly sent a DMCA takedown notice to DigitalRev’s webhost to remove a picture of its camera from the site. The photo was in article that compared GoPro against another camera. GoPro didn’t think DigitalRev copied their content, but that they were using a picture of the camera that had the wrong branding. GoPro should have sent DigitalRev an email with a correct image of the camera instead of getting the whole article pulled for alleged copyright infringement.

    2. Using the DMCA to Eliminate the Original
    This story really bothered me. Somebody copied someone’s original content onto their site, and then used the DMCA to claim that they were the real owners and get the original removed for its site. Thankfully the original author could get their work put back on their site by sending a DMCA counter takedown notice.

    Apparently this is a common incident. This behavior was so disturbing, I had to make a video about it.

    If you think you have questions about how you, your brand, or your content is being used online, please consult an intellectual property attorney. Don’t just send a DMCA takedown notice – that may not be the right tool to address your problem. When you send a DMCA takedown notice, you attest under the penalty of perjury, that your statements are true. If you send a DMCA takedown notice and it turns out what you did qualifies as what I call DMCA abuse, you may have committed a crime.

    For more information about copyright, please check out my book The Legal Side of Blogging: How Not to get Sued, Fired, Arrested, or Killed.
    You can connect with me on TwitterGoogle+FacebookYouTubeLinkedIn, or you can email me.
    Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.

  • Using Google Image Search to Detect Copyright Infringement

    Google Image SearchI heard you can input a picture into the Google Images search engine to see if someone has stolen or used one of your pictures without your consent. I decided to try to figure it out to see if it works.

    I’m happy to report it’s super easy. Here’s how you do it.

    1. Go to the Google Images search page.
    2. Click on the camera icon on the far right of the search bar. This will bring up the “search by image” box.
    3. Paste the URL for the image you want to search for or upload it and hit “Search.”
    4. The results will show you every instance where someone has used that photo.
    My paintball wound - Photo by Merlz Tamondong
    My paintball wound – Photo by Merlz Tamondong

    I started looking for images I’ve used on The Undeniable Ruth and I found an instance where someone pulled an image off my site without my permission. It’s a picture of me from Ladies’ Paintball Night. Someone put it on a paintball forum without asking me first. Even though this is a picture of me, I don’t own the copyright in it so there’s nothing I can do to get it removed, and to be honest, I don’t really care.

    This search engine is one tool you can use to search for copyright infringement, but it won’t catch every copy of your photos, just the copies of the photos from your site. I know this picture of my dog Rosie is on my site and I shared it with Attorney at Work for a post I wrote for them. I didn’t give them a copy of the image off my site, so when I searched for this picture of Rosie, it only showed images from my site, not theirs.

    My sweet Rosie dog
    My sweet Rosie dog

    If you’re worried about people stealing your work from your site, keep an eye on your analytics. A lot of people think it’s ok to use an image off your site as long as they give an attribution and a link to the source. All they may have done is committed copyright infringement and told you about it. I’ve discovered two instances of copyright infringement of my work this way.

    If you create any type of content and you’re concerned about copyright infringement, please consult a copyright attorney in your community who can help you create and implement a strategy to protect your work.

    Lights Camera Lawsuit

    There’s always a need for quality legal information for photographers. That’s why I created an online course called Lights Camera Lawsuit: The Legal Side of Professional Photography to address photographers’ most important questions. I want you to feel secure in your business, confident in the way you operate day-to-day, knowing that you’ve set yourself up to get paid what your worth without incident.

    At $497, the course contains nearly six hours of legal information you can immediately apply to your business. That’s less than what I charge for two hours of legal work for clients!  

    Please subscribe for more information and to make sure you don’t miss out on any special offers or discounts.

  • Choose Your Strategy to Protect Your Work Before Posting it on the Internet

    My artwork for Dans office by Romers from Flickr
    My artwork for Dans office by Romers from Flickr

    A friend recently asked me about a common situation her clients face. They are artists who, before the internet, could only show their work to a large audience at art festivals. She said these artists hesitate to market their work online because they’re afraid that it could be stolen.

    Could their work be illegally copied if they show it on the internet? Yes. I worked with an artist last year who had their entire catalog illegally copied.

    Should they us the internet to market their work despite this risk? Probably. If you’re an artist you have to weigh the risk of having your work illegally copied against the benefit of reaching a larger audience.

    My unsolicited advice to artists is to decide how you want to respond if your work is stolen before you put your work out there and plan accordingly.

    • If you want to sue the people who illegally copy your work, you have to register your copyrights with the U.S. Copyright Office.
    • If you want to license your work, meaning people can pay you for the right to reproduce your work on their sites, you need to have licensing terms and fees. This way people can legally purchase the rights to use your work and you can send a bill to the people who illegally copy your work. This recently happened to a friend of mine.
    •  If all you want to do is force them to remove the image when you detect someone’s stolen your work, you need to understand the Digital Millennium Copyright Act or know an attorney who does who can send the proper takedown notice on your behalf.

    When you put your work out there, you should be diligent about watching the internet for potential infringement. Often times people think they can use your work if they provide an attribution and a link to the original. What they’ve really done is made it easy for you to determine who is using your work without your permission.

    My two cents on this issue is you shouldn’t let your fears about copyright infringement prevent you from using the internet to market your work if you’re an artist, but you should have a strategy in place in advance for dealing with it when it occurs.

    For more information on this and related topics, please check out my book The Legal Side of Blogging: How Not to get Sued, Fired, Arrested, or Killed, available on Amazon.

    You can connect with me via TwitterGoogle+Facebook, YouTube, and LinkedIn, or you can email me.
    Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.

  • Woman Attacks Camera Man on Camelback

    Cholla Trail Landmark - Camelback Mountain by Dru Bloomfield - At Home in Scottsdale
    Cholla Trail Landmark – Camelback Mountain by Dru Bloomfield – At Home in Scottsdale

    Last week Pete Kosednar was hiking on Camelback Mountain when he saw a woman on the trail who didn’t have her dog on a leash. He turned on his video camera and asked her is she knew that her dog was supposed to be leashed. She didn’t appreciate being filmed and reacted by swearing at him and hitting him. Check out the video for yourself.

    Was Pete Kosednar wrong to film this woman? No! She was in a public place where she had no expectation of privacy. As long as he wasn’t filming her to commercialize her image or filming her in a way that constituted any type of harassment, there’s nothing she could do to stop him from filming her. And now the video is on YouTube where everyone can see her behaving badly.

    I understand that privacy is a hot-button topic for a lot of people. It is for me. However, you have no expectation of privacy for anything you do in view of the public so there’s nothing you can do to stop someone from filming you in most situations. Pete could probably strap a video camera to his head and tape most of his day-to-day activities without risk of penalty.

    There are some places where you can expect to not be filmed like public bathrooms, tanning beds,  locker rooms, and retail businesses that don’t allow you to take pictures or shoot video in the store. This woman was on Cholla Trail on Camelback Mountain. There are no special restrictions on shooting photos on video there.

    It also amuses me when people make a scene about being filmed in public. We have surveillance cameras everywhere – in the stores and shopping centers, on courthouses, monitoring freeway traffic, etc. It’s funny when people accept those cameras as a part of every day life but freak out when someone turns on the camera in their phone when they’re standing on the sidewalk or in a public park.

    The take-away lesson here is if you’re going to behave badly in public, whether you’re breaking the law, violating a social norm, or making an ass of yourself, don’t be surprised when you find out that someone videotaped it and posted it online.

    Feel free to connect with me via TwitterGoogle+Facebook, and LinkedIn, or you can email me.
    Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.
    Check out my ebook on Amazon – The Legal Side of Blogging: How Not to get Sued, Fired, Arrested, or Killed

    Hat tips to Phoenix New Times for running the story and Jeff Moriarty for telling me about it.

  • Options When Someone Violates Your Creative Commons License

    Portion of C.C. Chapman’s Twitter feed – September 10, 2012

    I saw the following tweet the other day by author C.C. Chapman: “Since my photos are licensed under “non-commercial” is this a legal use of my Chevy Volt photo by Yahoo?” The question was followed by a link to an article on Yahoo Auto about GM’s report regarding whether Chevy Volts are being sold at a loss. The photo accompanying the article is C.C. Chapman’s photo of a Chevy Volt that he published on Flickr with a Creative Commons license.

    This license requires anyone who uses the image to give C.C. Chapman the attribution, only use it for non-commercial use, and not alter the photo in any way. If the image appeared on Chevrolet’s blog, there would be a strong argument that Chevy uses its blog as a marketing tactic to get people to buy its vehicles; therefore every image on the blog is being used for a commercial use. In that case, the use of the image would have violated the license and C.C. Chapman’s copyright.

    However, Yahoo published the article. Yahoo isn’t trying to sell cars. It makes money by selling ads and it may charge advertisers based on the number of hits a page gets. C.C. Chapman could make an argument that Yahoo’s use of his photo had a commercial goal; but Yahoo could fire back that it was reporting the news so its use of C.C. Chapman’s photo was protected by fair use. Yahoo could show that it has a history of news reporting and that its articles are accepted as news, not a marketing ploy.

    But let’s say this photo appeared on a commercial website in violation of the Creative Commons license. That’s copyright infringement. What could C.C. Chapman do about it?

    1. Do nothing and be happy about the exposure.
    2. Get the photo removed by sending a DMCA takedown notice.
    3. Send the company a cease and desist letter.
    4. Send a bill with a licensing agreement and a letter that says the publisher has committed himself to paying a licensing fee since he already used the photo.
    5. Sue for copyright infringement.

    A lot of people would be happy about the exposure and may opt to do nothing. The downside of doing this is someone else could use your work and make a valid argument that your inaction set a precedent that others could use their work for commercial purposes. You may want to send a letter that offers to license the photo in exchange for the exposure and states if the company doesn’t license it then they have to remove it. That way, you will still get your exposure but you still exert your copyright rights in your work.

    If you have questions about how to protect your intellectual property rights, contact an intellectual property attorney (like me) in your community.

    Feel free to connect with me via TwitterFacebook, and LinkedIn, or you can email me.
    Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.

    Lights Camera Lawsuit

    There’s always a need for quality legal information for photographers. That’s why I created an online course called Lights Camera Lawsuit: The Legal Side of Professional Photography to address photographers’ most important questions. I want you to feel secure in your business, confident in the way you operate day-to-day, knowing that you’ve set yourself up to get paid what your worth without incident.

    At $497, the course contains nearly six hours of legal information you can immediately apply to your business. That’s less than what I charge for two hours of legal work for clients!  

    Please subscribe for more information and to make sure you don’t miss out on any special offers or discounts.

  • DMCA Takedown FTW: The Follow-up

    Don't Steal by Uncleweed, Ruth Carter, Carter Law Firm
    Don’t Steal by Uncleweed

    Last week I posted a blog about my experience sending a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notice to Google. A few questions have come up since I put up the post, and I wanted to address them.

    When I first noticed that another blogger had taken a photo from my blog and posted it on her site, one of my friends asked me why I sent a DMCA takedown notice instead of just sending her an email. That’s a valid question, and an option I considered.  I chose to send a DMCA takedown notice because I’d never sent one before I wanted to experience the process. I had no malicious intent. The blog where the copyright infringement was occurring was taken down in about 24 hours, and the blogger who stole my work changed the image and had the post back up in less than a day after that.

    It seems like a lot of people use images they find online without thinking about the potential legal implications. This situation could have been a lot worse. My blog is not currently registered with the U.S. Copyright Office, but that’s on my to-do list. If I registered my blog and sued for infringement in this situation, I would only be eligible for my actual damages, which is probably nothing.

    If you steal an image from a blog that was registered with the U.S. Copyright Office within 3 months of publication or 1 month of learning of the infringement (whichever happens first), you could be sued for copyright infringement and ordered to pay the copyright owner’s statutory damages and attorneys’ fees. In the worst case scenario, you could be ordered to pay up to $150,000 in damages plus attorneys’ fees.

    So what’s the take home lesson? Be thoughtful about the images you use on your blog. Only use images that are available under Creative Commons. If there’s an image that you want to use that doesn’t come with a Creative Commons license, get permission from the copyright owner to use the image.

    Feel free to connect with me via TwitterGoogle+Facebook, and LinkedIn.
    Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.

  • DMCA Takedown FTW

    Poolside Studying, Ruth CarterI think I do a decent job monitoring my blogs with my sites’ widgets and Google Analytics. I like to see where my readers live and how they ended up on my sites. When I see that someone got to my blog from a site that’s unfamiliar to me, I try to find the post that linked to my site to see what it said.

    Poolside Studying, Ruth Carter
    This is the image that was stolen from The Undeniable Ruth

    This week, someone got to The Undeniable Ruth via a blog on BlogSpot. I checked out that blog and found that the blogger didn’t write a post that referred to me or a topic I’ve written about. She copied an image from my post about studying in the pool. She mentioned the name of the post she got the image from, but she didn’t ask my permission to use the image or even give me an attribution. Unfortunately for her, she copied one of the few images that I personally took with my camera phone and own the copyright to it. I decided to send a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notice to Google, which owns BlogSpot.

    The DMCA is a law that provides a safe harbor to companies that don’t control the content on their sites. They have to remove or disable access to the infringing material when they receive a DMCA takedown notice or else they can be liable for copyright infringement. To qualify for protection under the DMCA, you have to register a designated agent with the U.S. Copyright Office. This is the person you send the takedown notice to.

    Google has a DMCA agent, so I sent them a takedown notice to get my picture taken off BlogSpot. A takedown notice is a simple letter that must include the following:

    1. Your physical or electronic signature,
    2. The identity of your work that is allegedly being infringed,
    3. The specific URL for the website where the infringement is occurring,
    4. Your contact information (i.e., your address, telephone number, and/or email address),
    5. A statement that you have a good faith belief that the material violates the law or the copyright owner’s rights, and
    6. A statement, under penalty of perjury, that the notice is accurate.

    I emailed my takedown notice to Google yesterday and I got a response today that informed me that the post was taken down. I tried to visit the BlogSpot post where my photo was published, and verified that the blog post was taken down. I thought they were only going to remove the photo. She can put the post back up if she wants, just not with my picture.

    If you create content, it important to keep an eye on your analytics so you can detect when someone steals your work. I was pleased to see that the DMCA takedown process was fast and easy and that Google was responsive to my notice.

    If you detect someone’s stolen your content, consult an attorney to determine your options for recourse.

    Feel free to connect with me via TwitterGoogle+Facebook, and LinkedIn.
    Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.