Home U.S. Coin Forum

Another photo rights question

2»

Comments

  • braddickbraddick Posts: 24,011 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @YQQ said:
    YOU take a picture of ME with MY camera.
    WHO owns the copyright to that picture?
    is it YOU, or is it I ????

    it is a clear-cut answer.

    It was clear until you came up with your own scenario.

    :neutral:

    peacockcoins

  • BAJJERFANBAJJERFAN Posts: 31,083 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Crypto said:
    What you can do vs the legal options sellers have are two different things. Most sellers don’t care but if you turned around and sold that coin back on eBay for a profit using the sellers photos. It would be a simple and effective argument for that seller to claim that your infringement on their IP is what enabled you to profit entitling them to that profit and damages. The photo is a weirdly protected class of product. The laws were developed when film was analogous to canvas and not with the digital age in mind

    I think you might have a hard time proving that the higher price on a relist was due to the photo since it didn't bring a comparable price the first time around. There are lots of reasons why the same coin brings different prices in the same or different venues. it could just as easily be argued that your poor photo is why it brought less when you sold it. BTW how much money would it be worth your time for? $10?

    theknowitalltroll;
  • BAJJERFANBAJJERFAN Posts: 31,083 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @CaptHenway said:
    Oh, I have asked a few of the sellers for permission to use their photos in my book with credit to them and everybody has said yes. I was just curious as to what the law is.

    Do you actually use the word permission in your credit?

    theknowitalltroll;
  • CryptoCrypto Posts: 3,697 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BAJJERFAN said:

    @Crypto said:
    What you can do vs the legal options sellers have are two different things. Most sellers don’t care but if you turned around and sold that coin back on eBay for a profit using the sellers photos. It would be a simple and effective argument for that seller to claim that your infringement on their IP is what enabled you to profit entitling them to that profit and damages. The photo is a weirdly protected class of product. The laws were developed when film was analogous to canvas and not with the digital age in mind

    I think you might have a hard time proving that the higher price on a relist was due to the photo since it didn't bring a comparable price the first time around. There are lots of reasons why the same coin brings different prices in the same or different venues. it could just as easily be argued that your poor photo is why it brought less when you sold it. BTW how much money would it be worth your time for? $10?

    Not that hard, contributing factors being obvious. 90% of auctions is photos with the rest timing and words. That said I have seen lawyers successfully argue photos = website traffic = business = revenue and used that to file discovery motions over the company’s financials which brought them to the settlement table. All over an improperly harvested photo thrown into main page background of a website built by a third party developer.

    An entry point into the gamesmanship of litigation vs the actuality of the situation are not always overlapping. There are companies that have lawyers who do nothing but Google-image their protected images and go full bore as soon as they find a legit entity using them.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file