| |||||||||||||||||||||
| Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > DMCA Safe Harbor > Notices > Photographer Claims Blogger Infringed Photos (NoticeID 928, http://chillingeffects.org/N/928) | Location: https://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/notice.cgi?NoticeID=928 |
October 21, 2003
|
Sender Information: |
Recipient Information:
[Private]
Blogger [Google, Inc.]
Mountain View, CA, 94043, USA
Sent via: Fax
Re: Are you hosting this URL?
Subject: Re. [# 15240] Are you hosting this URL : TO: [private]@trakken.com (SEE JPEG IMAGE ATTACHMENT BELOW). TWO IMAGES ARE BEING DRAWN DIRECTLY FROM MY OWN DOMAIN THEODORFEIBEL.COM WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION AND WITHOUT PERMISSION. ADDITIONALLY: "I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above on the allegedly infringing web pages is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law, " ON OCTOBER 09, 2003 I TRIED TO CONTACT [private] OF [private] SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107 TEL xxx.xxx.xxxx BY TELEPHONE AND BY EMAIL, BUT WITHOUT SUCCESS. [private] IS LISTED AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONTACT FOR BLOGSPOT.COM . THE FOLLOWING IS THE INFORMATION LISTED ON BLOGSPOT.COM IN CONCLUSION: IMAGES WHICH I OWN THE COPYRIGHT TO ARE BEING DISPLAYED IN AN UNAUTHORIZED I WISH FOR MY IMAGES TO BE REMOVED FROM THE OFFENDING SITE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!!! GIVEN THE CLARITY OF INFRINGEMENT OBVIOUS IN THIS CASE, I WILL NOT HESITATE TO INITIATE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS IF NEED BE. SINCERELY YOURS, [private] PRESIDENT [private] [private]@trakken.com wrote: Mr. [private] > We have received your complaint via fax and wish to process It. However, it is not complete and is missing > I have included the steps that complaints must adhere to in order to be > 1) posts must be identified by permalink or date. Identifying the entire > 2) Include the following statement: "I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described > 3) Include the following statement: "I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification > Please sign and fax your revised complaint to: [private], Attn: >Thank you for your co operation. Your complaint will be processed pending > Sincerely, > [private] > More importantly: HAVE YOU STOPPED > [private] [private] President [private]
http://roundaboutmidnight.blogspot.com/ ?
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 18:33:40 0400
From: Theodor Feibel [private]@theodorfeibel.com
Organization, Theodor Feibel, Photographer
To: [private]@trakken.com
References: 1
THE URL http://roundaboutmidnight.blogspot.com/" HAS THE STRUCTURE SHOWN IN
THE IMAGE ATTACHMENT:
IN ADDITION, THE TWO IMAGES ARE FULLY PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT AND BELONG TO ME
AS AUTHOR. THE IMAGE IDENTIFIED ON MY WERSITE AS /TF09LISA3 IS
REGISTERED WITH THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS COPYRIGHT OFFICE UNDER UAU 354 470
AND THE IMAGE ON MY WEBSITE IDENTIFIED AS /TF02 IS REGISTERED WITH THE
COPYR1GHT OFFICE UNDER UAU 357 760.
THERE IS NO AMBIGUITY AS TO THE OWNERSHIP OF THESE IMAGES THEY BELONG TO
ME
ADDTIONALLY: " I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed."
Organization:
Pyra.com Ltd.
[private]
[private]
San Francisco, CA 94107
US
Phone: xxxxxxxxxx
Emall: [private]@pyra.com
Registrar Name .... : Register.com
Registrar Whois ....: whois.register.com
Registrar Homepage: http://www.register.com
Domain Name: BLOGSPOT.CUM
Created on : Mon,Jul 31, 2000
Expires on : Thu, Jul 31, 2006
Record last updated on..: Mon, Aug 04, 2003
Administratwe Contact:
Pyra.com Ltd.
[private]
[private]
San Francisco, CA 94107
US
Phone: [private]
Emall: [private]@pyra.com
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Register.Com
Domain Registrar
[private]
New York, NY 10018
US
Phone:[private]
Fax....:[private]
Email: [private]@register.com
Domain servers in listed order:
[private].REGISTER.COM [private]
[private].REGISTER.COM [private]
Register your domain name at http://www.register.com
MANNER,
[private], PHOTOGRAPHER
NEW YORK, NEWYORK 10003
[private]
[private] FAX
EMAIL: [private]@THEODORFEIBEL.COM
> several pieces of information needed for us to proceed.
> processed. In particular please revise your complaint to address the following:
> blog is not sufficient
> above on the allegedly infringing web pages is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
> is accurate and that I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner or an exclusive
> right that is allegedly infringed.
> Blogger, DMCA complaints
> its completion,
> Original Message Follows:
>
> From: [private] [private]@theodorfeibel.com
> Subject: Re: [# I 5240] Are you hosting this URL:
> http://roundaboutmidnight.blogspot.com/ ?
> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 18:33:40 0480
> http://roundaboutmidnight.blogspot.com/
>FROM LOADING MY IMAGES ?!!!
PRESIDENT
[private], PHOTOGRAPHER
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10003
[private]
[private] FAX
EMAIL: [private]@THEODORFEIBEL.COM
HTTP://WWW.THEODORFEIBEL.COM
|
Question: What are the provisions of 17 U.S.C. Section 512(c)(3) & 512(d)(3)? Answer: Section 512(c)(3) sets out the elements for notification under the DMCA. Subsection A (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(A)) states that to be effective a notification must include: 1) a physical/electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the infringed right; 2) identification of the copyrighted works claimed to have been infringed; 3) identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed; 4) information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party (e.g., the address, telephone number, or email address); 5) a statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material is not authorized by the copyright owner; and 6) a statement that information in the complaint is accurate and that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner. Subsection B (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(B)) states that if the complaining party does not substantially comply with these requirements the notice will not serve as actual notice for the purpose of Section 512. Section 512(d)(3), which applies to "information location tools" such as search engines and directories, incorporates the above requirements; however, instead of the identification of the allegedly infringing material, the notification must identify the reference or link to the material claimed to be infringing. Question: What defines a service provider under Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)?
Answer: A service provider is defined as "an entity offering transmission, routing, or providing connections for digital online communications, between or among points specified by a user, of material of the user's choosing, without modification to the content of the material as sent or received" or "a provider of online services or network access, or the operator of facilities thereof." [512(k)(1)(A-B)] This broad definition includes network services companies such as Internet service providers (ISPs), search engines, bulletin board system operators, and even auction web sites. In A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster Inc., the court refused to extend the safe harbor provisions to the Napster software program and service, leaving open the question of whether peer-to-peer networks also qualify for safe harbor protection under Section 512. There are four major categories of network systems offered by service providers that qualify for protection under the safe harbor provisions:
Question: Do plot synopses and reproductions of photographs infringe on copyrights? Answer: A plot synopsis may or may not infringe on a copyright, depending on whether the court finds that the use of original material is fair use. Photographs are protected by the copyright holder's rights to both reproduce and display his work, and this right may be violated by posting those photographs on the Internet. Question: What is an "inline" image?
Answer: An "inline" image refers to a graphic displayed in the context of a page, such as the picture to the right here. Question: What kinds of things are copyrightable? Answer: In order for material to be copyrightable, it must be original and must be in a fixed medium. Only material that originated with the author can support a copyright. Items from the public domain which appear in a work, as well as work borrowed from others, cannot be the subject of an infringement claim. Also, certain stock material might not be copyrightable, such as footage that indicates a location like the standard shots of San Francisco in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. Also exempted are stock characters like the noisy punk rocker who gets the Vulcan death grip in Star Trek IV. The requirement that works be in a fixed medium leaves out certain forms of expression, most notably choreography and oral performances such as speeches. For instance, if I perform a Klingon death wail in a local park, my performance is not copyrightable. However, if I film the performance, then the film is copyrightable. Single words and short phrases are generally not protected by copyright, even when the name has been "coined" or newly-created by the mark owner. Logos that include original design elements can be protected under copyright or under trademark. Otherwise, words, phrases and titles may be protected only by trademark, however. Question: What rights are protected by copyright law? Answer: The purpose of copyright law is to encourage creative work by granting a temporary monopoly in an author's original creations. This monopoly takes the form of six rights in areas where the author retains exclusive control. These rights are: (1) the right of reproduction (i.e., copying), The law of copyright protects the first two rights in both private and public contexts, whereas an author can only restrict the last four rights in the public sphere. Claims of infringement must show that the defendant exercised one of these rights. For example, if I create unauthorized videotape copies of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan and distribute them to strangers on the street, then I have infringed both the copyright holder's rights of reproduction and distribution. If I merely re-enact The Wrath of Khan for my family in my home, then I have not infringed on the copyright. Names, ideas and facts are not protected by copyright. Trademark law, in contrast, is designed to protect consumers from confusion as to the source of goods (as well as to protect the trademark owner's market). To this end, the law gives the owner of a registered trademark the right to use the mark in commerce without confusion. If someone introduces a trademark into the market that is likely to cause confusion, then the newer mark infringes on the older one. The laws of trademark infringement and dilution protect against this likelihood of confusion. Trademark protects names, images and short phrases. Infringement protects against confusion about the origin of goods. The plaintiff in an infringement suit must show that defendant's use of the mark is likely to cause such a confusion. For instance, if I were an unscrupulous manufacturer, I might attempt to capitalize on the fame of Star Trek by creating a line of 'Spock Activewear.' If consumers could reasonably believe that my activewear was produced or endorsed by the owners of the Spock trademark, then I would be liable for infringement. The law of trademark dilution protects against confusion concerning the character of a registered trademark. Suppose I created a semi-automatic assault rifle and marketed it as 'The Lt. Uhura 5000.' Even if consumers could not reasonably believe that the Star Trek trademark holders produced this firearm, the trademark holders could claim that my use of their mark harmed the family-oriented character of their mark. I would be liable for dilution. Question: Who may hold a copyright? Answer: A copyright ordinarily vests in the creator or creators of a work (known as the author(s)), and is inherited as ordinary property. Copyrights are freely transferrable as property, at the discretion of the owner. 17 U.S.C. Question: How can I find out whether a work has a registered copyright? Answer: Works are copyrighted as soon as they are "fixed in a tangible medium of expression," but some legal rights and remedies are available only if the work's copyright is registered. To find a copyright registration, you may search copyright records at the Copyright Office website, but be aware that not finding a match does not mean the work is uncopyrighted. Question: What is copyright infringement? Are there any defenses? Answer: Infringement occurs whenever someone who is not the copyright holder (or a licensee of the copyright holder) exercises one of the exclusive rights listed above. The most common defense to an infringement claim is "fair use," a doctrine that allows people to use copyrighted material without permission in certain situations, such as quotations in a book review. To evaluate fair use of copyrighted material, the courts consider four factors:
The most significant factor in this analysis is the fourth, effect on the market. If a copier's use supplants demand for the original work, then it will be very difficult for him or her to claim fair use. On the other hand, if the use does not compete with the original, for example because it is a parody, criticism, or news report, it is more likely to be permitted as "fair use." Trademarks are generally subject to fair use in two situations: First, advertisers and other speakers are allowed to use a competitor's trademark when referring to that competitor's product ("nominative use"). Second, the law protects "fair comment," for instance, in parody. Question: What does a service provider have to do in order to qualify for safe harbor protection?
Answer: In addition to informing its customers of its policies (discussed above), a service provider must follow the proper notice and takedown procedures (discussed above) and also meet several other requirements in order to qualify for exemption under the safe harbor provisions. In order to facilitate the notification process in cases of infringement, ISPs which allow users to store information on their networks, such as a web hosting service, must designate an agent that will receive the notices from copyright owners that its network contains material which infringes their intellectual property rights. The service provider must then notify the Copyright Office of the agent's name and address and make that information publicly available on its web site. [512(c)(2)] Finally, the service provider must not have knowledge that the material or activity is infringing or of the fact that the infringing material exists on its network. [512(c)(1)(A)], [512(d)(1)(A)]. If it does discover such material before being contacted by the copyright owners, it is instructed to remove, or disable access to, the material itself. [512(c)(1)(A)(iii)], [512(d)(1)(C)]. The service provider must not gain any financial benefit that is attributable to the infringing material. [512(c)(1)(B)], [512(d)(2)]. Question: What defenses are there to copyright infringement? Answer: The primary defense to copyright infringement is "fair use." 17 U.S.C. Question: What are the possible penalties for copyright infringement?
Answer: Under the Copyright Act, penalties for copyright infringement can include:
A copyright owner can only sue for infringement on a work whose copyright was registered with the Copyright Office, and can get statutory damages and attorney's fees only if the copyright registration was filed before infringement or within three months of first publication. (17 U.S.C. 411 and 412) Question: What are the notice and takedown procedures for web sites?
Answer: In order to have an allegedly infringing web site removed from a service provider's network, or to have access to an allegedly infringing website disabled, the copyright owner must provide notice to the service provider with the following information:
Once notice is given to the service provider, or in circumstances where the service provider discovers the infringing material itself, it is required to expeditiously remove, or disable access to, the material. The safe harbor provisions do not require the service provider to notify the individual responsible for the allegedly infringing material before it has been removed, but they do require notification after the material is removed. Question: Does a copyright owner have to specify the exact materials it alleges are infringing?
Answer: Proper notice under the safe harbor provisions requires the copyright owners to specifically identify the alleged infringing materials, or if the service provider is an "information location tool" such as a search engine, to specifically identify the links to the alleged infringing materials. [512(c)(3)(iii)], [512(d)(3)]. The provisions also require the copyright owners to identify the copyrighted work, or a representative list of the copyrighted works, that is claimed to be infringed. [512(c)(3)(A)(ii)]. Rather than simply sending a letter to the service provider that claims that infringing material exists on their system, these qualifications ensure that service providers are given a reasonable amount of information to locate the infringing materials and to effectively police their networks. [512(c)(3)(A)(iii)], [512(d)(3)]. However, in the recent case of ALS Scan, Inc. v. Remarq Communities, Inc., the court found that the copyright owner did not have to point out all of the infringing material, but only substantially all of the material. The relaxation of this specificity requirement shifts the burden of identifying the material to the service provider, raising the question of the extent to which a service provider must search through its system. OSP customers should note that this situation might encourage OSP's to err on the side of removing allegedly infringing material. Question: What are the counter-notice and put-back procedures?
Answer: In order to ensure that copyright owners do not wrongly insist on the removal of materials that actually do not infringe their copyrights, the safe harbor provisions require service providers to notify the subscribers if their materials have been removed and to provide them with an opportunity to send a written notice to the service provider stating that the material has been wrongly removed. [512(g)] If a subscriber provides a proper "counter-notice" claiming that the material does not infringe copyrights, the service provider must then promptly notify the claiming party of the individual's objection. [512(g)(2)] If the copyright owner does not bring a lawsuit in district court within 14 days, the service provider is then required to restore the material to its location on its network. [512(g)(2)(C)] A proper counter-notice must contain the following information:
If it is determined that the copyright holder misrepresented its claim regarding the infringing material, the copyright holder then becomes liable to the person harmed for any damages that resulted from the improper removal of the material. [512(f)] See also How do I file a DMCA counter-notice?, and the counter-notification generator. Question: What are the DMCA Safe Harbor Provisions?
Answer: In 1998, Congress passed the On-Line Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) in an effort to protect service providers on the Internet from liability for the activities of its users. Codified as section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), this new law exempts on-line service providers that meet the criteria set forth in the safe harbor provisions from claims of copyright infringement made against them that result from the conduct of their customers. These safe harbor provisions are designed to shelter service providers from the infringing activities of their customers. If a service provider qualifies for the safe harbor exemption, only the individual infringing customer are liable for monetary damages; the service provider's network through which they engaged in the alleged activities is not liable. |
|
|