Ebay image theft ramifications. Intellectual and visual property theft. Legal recourse?
wingedliberty
Posts: 4,805 ✭✭✭
In light of what has happened to mnm and wayne herndon. What is the legal recourse.
Isn't it intellectual and visual property theft?
Brian.
Isn't it intellectual and visual property theft?
Brian.
0
Comments
Actually ebay does do something when someone uses your pictures. I have had that happen many times.
Here is a link to the info: http://pages.ebay.com/help/community/png-copyrights.html
Here is the info that would help.
How to protect your copyrighted descriptions and images which you have previously used on eBay.
Occasionally, you may find that your image or description text has been used by another seller in their listing. If that happens, please report this to Trust & Safety.
To report the unauthorized use of your copyrighted image to eBay, go to our Contact Rules & Safety web form and click on: "Questionable Content on eBay", then "Unauthorized use of image, text, or links", and then "Use of Pictures, Text, or Links without permission". You will be provided with an email form, where you can enter the offending item number in the item number box. Be sure to include an item number of one of your listings containing your copyrighted material in the body of the email to us. Please also explain exactly how your rights have been violated.
Remember that you can only report images that you own the copyright to, such as pictures you took yourself. If you obtained the images from the internet, you likely do not have any rights in them.
Hope that helped. I had to print out some kind of form and fill it out, sign it stating I owned the picture and fax it to ebay before they did anything. But it worked.
Lori
<< <i>I belive so but doesn't it have to be copyrighted inorder to take legal action. >>
I don't have time to search posts now, but I'm almost POSITIVE Frattlaw posted the copyright law once before-
I am almost positive it said that if you create it, you own the copyright unless you specifically sell or give the usage rights; therefore, by taking the picture, it is your copyright.
Jeremy
OK, you sue the guy. So now you have to find an attorney or file yourself. Costs time and/or money. Most attorneys will laugh in your face as the settlement if won will be puny. Nevermind the difficulty proving it was "deliberate".
Bottomline, why bother! Move one, life is short.
Brian
your original work you have a copyright on the picture, words. The details we let the land sharks handle.
Everything is linear if plotted log-log with a fat magic marker
Are we talking about buying a coin and keeping the scan provided by the original seller, then down the road the current owner of the coin, selling the coin and using the same scan?
if the first, then it is completely dishonest and misrepresents what is being sold. If it is the latter...does anyone care??
Tyler
WH
What are the monetary damages of somebody leaching an image of a coin? How do you prove these damages monetarily?
I can see using a proven logo like Coca-cola, et.al. as an advertising aid, how do you prove that an image has any value?
(a) In General. - Except as otherwise provided by this title, an
infringer of copyright is liable for either -
(1) the copyright owner's actual damages and any additional
profits of the infringer, as provided by subsection (b); or
(2) statutory damages, as provided by subsection (c).
(b) Actual Damages and Profits. - The copyright owner is entitled
to recover the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of
the infringement, and any profits of the infringer that are
attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in
computing the actual damages. In establishing the infringer's
profits, the copyright owner is required to present proof only of
the infringer's gross revenue, and the infringer is required to
prove his or her deductible expenses and the elements of profit
attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work.
(c) Statutory Damages. -
(1) Except as provided by clause (2) of this subsection, the
copyright owner may elect, at any time before final judgment is
rendered, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an
award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the
action, with respect to any one work, for which any one infringer
is liable individually, or for which any two or more infringers
are liable jointly and severally, in a sum of not less than $750
or more than $30,000 as the court considers just. For the
purposes of this subsection, all the parts of a compilation or
derivative work constitute one work.
(2) In a case where the copyright owner sustains the burden of
proving, and the court finds, that infringement was committed
willfully, the court in its discretion may increase the award of
statutory damages to a sum of not more than $150,000. In a case
where the infringer sustains the burden of proving, and the court
finds, that such infringer was not aware and had no reason to
believe that his or her acts constituted an infringement of
copyright, the court in its discretion may reduce the award of
statutory damages to a sum of not less than $200. The court shall
remit statutory damages in any case where an infringer believed
and had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her use of
the copyrighted work was a fair use under section 107, if the
infringer was: (i) an employee or agent of a nonprofit
educational institution, library, or archives acting within the
scope of his or her employment who, or such institution, library,
or archives itself, which infringed by reproducing the work in
copies or phonorecords; or (ii) a public broadcasting entity
which or a person who, as a regular part of the nonprofit
activities of a public broadcasting entity (as defined in
subsection (g) of section 118) infringed by performing a
published nondramatic literary work or by reproducing a
transmission program embodying a performance of such a work.
(d) Additional Damages in Certain Cases. - In any case in which
the court finds that a defendant proprietor of an establishment who
claims as a defense that its activities were exempt under section
110(5) did not have reasonable grounds to believe that its use of a
copyrighted work was exempt under such section, the plaintiff shall
be entitled to, in addition to any award of damages under this
section, an additional award of two times the amount of the license
fee that the proprietor of the establishment concerned should have
paid the plaintiff for such use during the preceding period of up
to 3 years.
Copyright actions are usually filed in Federal District Court and all matters are heard before a US Federal Judge, no jury, unless you want one. It's rather black and white sometimes. Ebay, may also be a defendant since they allowed the infringement. However, internet intellectual property is a rapidily expanding area of law and trying to apply existing copyright case law is sometimes like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.
For those that do it, it could be a rather high price to pay. I actually defended myself in Federal Court while studying for the Bar years ago due to some work I performed for a former employer. The case would have been one of first impression and has been written about worldwide in various legal journals and articles. Trust me, it can get nasty and quite expensive due to the statutory damage provision. You can elect those and not even have to prove actual damages. $150,000 per willful violation is quite a lot of money to pay.
Hope this helps and if anyone needs some legal help in this area, feel free to drop me a line. Ebay's servers are in California, where I am licensed to practice.
Michael
Brian.
I understand eBay isn't a court of law, so they MAY not CURRENTLY require such proof, but surely "copyright infringement" would need to be determined in court, and I think it would be difficult to prove, unless you've taken certain measures to identify your piece as exclusively yours.
While you may not like the fact someone stole your picture or auction wording, bottom line, there aren't any damages of significance.
Michael
<< <i>Images, paintings, photographs, original works of music, words or sounds are implicitly protected by US copyright laws, without official registration or display of copyright signs. >>