Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/11/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I really doubt that Google has the power to remove photos from other web sites. It has been pointed out that most likely the kid did not get the photo off a Google-owned site, but simply used Google to find it which is not the same thing. The most Google can do is to remove an offending site from its search results, but it has no power to actually shut down a site or remove contents from it. As for copyright, it is NOT necessary to have registered the copyright in order to enforce it. Copyright, as opposed to other IP rights, is inherent in the act of creation and does not depend on registration. This is true even in countries like the US which do have a copyright registry. The only difference it makes is that it makes it easier to prove that you had crated the work at a certain point in time. In the case of Ted's well-known photo, the case should be very clear-cut in any event. Cheers, Nathan Nathan Wajsman Alicante, Spain http://www.frozenlight.eu http://www.greatpix.eu PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws Blog: http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/ YNWA On Nov 30, 2012, at 3:07 AM, Tina Manley wrote: > Ted, > > You can contact Google and ask them to remove your photos from the site > where the kid found it. Google is pretty good about protecting copyright > if you confirm that the site does not have permission to post your > copyright protected photo. This has just been discussed recently on ASMP > websites and photographers have gotten their photos removed by Google. > > In the USA, in order to sue, you have to have registered the photo with the > copyright office before publication, but I'm not sure how that works in > Canada. > > Most of the ASMP members think that it's not worth going after casual > offenders and that the extra exposure offered by a Google search is worth > any student copying the photo as a print. Commercial use would be an > entirely different matter! > > Good luck! > > Tina > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 6:18 PM, <tedgrant at shaw.ca> wrote: > >> Hi Crew, >> OK here's one for you, certainly any of the legal beagles out there? :-( >> >> I was shown my photo of Prime Minister Trudeau sliding down the staircase >> railing at a high school today by a student who asked me to autograph it. >> "Where did you get this print?" I asked? And he responded... "oh you can >> get it off GOOGLE in many sizes!" oops and thank you very much! >> >> So Google have one of my pictures in their "Photo collection" without >> permission, they charge for prints! Do not have any rights to the photo >> let >> alone selling prints! As the Gallery representing sales of my photography >> have and look after all interest in this photo as described: "The most >> ICONIC political photograph in the history of Canada." >> >> Is there a wild possibility we can sue them unless they remove the photo >> off their site and certainly stop the for sale. And at the moment I, we? >> Have never been asked about it's use and where they got an original photo? >> >> Suggestions.... GOOD, BAD OR UGLY. I thought I could sue for a million and >> get a MONOCHROME! :-) >> >> thank you all for your insight and suggestions. >> >> cheers, >> Dr. ted. >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See >> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>for >> more information >> >> > > > -- > Tina Manley, ASMP > www.tinamanley.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >