Intellectual Property and Copyright Theft In Our Industry.

[Bigdawg]

My first year selling at Bristol Motor Speedway - the gentleman next to us had Git-R-Done (or however the copyrighted one goes) blatently for sale. Not only did we watch him be arrested - we also watched them take his stock of shirts (all of them) and his brand new truck and trailer (they were used in transporting them across state lines).

We were sweating it pretty bad because we had some modified brand logos that said Bristol (as well as some other changes) that the TBI looked very, very closely at - enough to come back a second time and look. Scared the you-know-what out of us, but we were apparently okay.

They do get the little guys for copyright.

 

[JimJenson]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress

 

[javila]

What I did was very wrong, and I learned quite a bit about copyright infringement. I learned a few things actually...

I have typed this many times already, and the past 2 days have been making me sick because not only is there little work coming in, but now I have to worry about a lawsuit and actually losing my business while having a baby on the way. Yes... It IS my own fault and I made a terrible mistake.

The worst part about it is knowing I am a good man and my wife tells me I'm a good man, but to look in the mirror and say... Well am I??.... THAT truly sucks. No one here knows me personally, and now I don't even know if anyone here cares, but I AM a good man. I am a good man with a big heart with a family and a home. I liked coming here to see what people showed, because no matter what you all think of me now, I am ALWAYS pushing myself to do better as a business man and an artist and I always ask how'd they do that?.

I see Fellers and everyone else's prices on clipart images, and I have to ask myself... Do I buy the clipart or pay the electric bill? How many people here have been in this situation before:

The phone hasn't wrang more than twice a day in the past few months, the bills are backing up.. credit card companies calling... supply houses calling.... and this person comes in....
Thanks for coming in sir/mam this is my price for that wrap... Thanks buddy but I see your work and I want to give you ALL of my business but the guy over here will sell the wrap to me for this much, and that's a couple of hundred bucks less than you are... sir/mam do you understand this guy works out of his house and wraps in his driveway, and what we are charging you for pays for the CORRECT way for us to do your job?.... Times are tight these days sign guy... I need to keep all the pennies I have.... end....???? What do you do when you are in that situation?

Maybe I'm the only one. I don't want to go out of business, so unfortunately I have to take that job because I am still in the beginning stages of business. Obviously what I did was wrong, and against the law, and I WILL have to pay for it no matter what. I've never been looked at as an outcast, or a hack, or an art theif before, but I can tell you all... You don't want this. I take great pride in what I do, and yes... there are times when I lack the talent, or the time, or the skills, or the resources to finish a job that is paying my bills, so I go to the internet for help. I DO THIS. Right, wrong or indifferent I have a family to provide for and that is what is most important to me.

SOMEONE ratted me out in my own "community" to make an example of me, and they did. EVERYTHING on the internet is traceable. That was another lesson I learned. I guess I'm the only one who has made something for someone else weather it is a vinyl decal, a wall graphic, or a vehicle wrap that involved a part of someone else's art. Or I am simply the guy who got caught.

If you care about your community and you want to help them... GET TO KNOW THEM and then form your own opinion of what they stand for before you bash their character. That shit hurts guys.

If you want to know me and what I stand for, then pick up the phone... The way we help each other is by pointing fingers? If that is how THIS community helps out is less stronger members then I don't want to be part of it.

I did a very amateur thing people, but to the people I did it for, they thought it was an amazing job... Now I know where I stand, and thanks for the reality check.

Where do I go from here? One day at a time. Our past shows where we've been, and explains why we are the way we are, and we choose today to learn from the past so hopefully we don't make the same mistake in the future. I didn't have to post this at all, but I did because I have to do what makes me happy and my family proud. I am a man and I admit... I f*cked up.

STW will be back, better, and changed, and so will I.

Get in touch with the photographer, explain the situation. Odds are he won't be looking for monotary compensation as long as your remove the product.

Get in touch with the customer, explain the situation, remove the wrap asap.
Eat the cost of said wrap.

The chances of you losing your business over this are very slim. That'll be depdent on how the photographer reacts to how you wish to resolve the situation.

 

[cptcorn]

A company I used to work for got a slap on the wrist from Fox Racing before I worked there. They were making some small 4" Fox logos and selling them for a few dollars. Somehow Fox found out, and off to the lawyers they went. What happened to them was literally a slap on the wrist. They are still in business and doing better than ever. I don't believe it's anyone's wish for anyone, to put anyone else out of business.

Many of us have worked so extremely hard at positioning ourselves in this trade and have learned everything we possibly could about our own industry, before even taking that first step of forming our own companies. To accept this type of behavior is a disgrace. I can handle people using stuff for personal use and it may be hypocritical for me to say that, but as Doug mentioned, it is a very long stretch between that, and intentionally trying to create revenue from it.

One question that hasn't been asked and it's been thrown around a bit in this thread is; What sort of limitations do the IP holders have to be aware of when protecting their property. Maybe this part of the law should be changed as our businesses and lifestyles slowly change to a more digital era. Years ago you wouldn't have these sorts of problems because people weren't so tempted at what they see at their finger tips. The internet has changed a lot of this.

It raises a lot of questions about how much the original artists should be compensated. Should the owners open their books and show how much was made from that specific product? What if the company originally flourished because of that initial work where copyrighted material was used. That company might have good legal grounds to say that their copyrighted work, bankrolled your company.

Maybe a sort of standardized Creative Commons licensing system needs to be established across all industries in order to help people be more educated when it comes to this. It seems like the laws that are established are their based upon how things used to work and that in itself is creating problems. A company years ago had to go through quite a bit of work in order to substantially copy work. Maybe a change is needed to reflect our digital times...

 

[Marlene]

I did a very amateur thing people, but to the people I did it for, they thought it was an amazing job... Now I know where I stand, and thanks for the reality check.

the thing is that is was a very amateur thing to do and we, the old timers have been doing our best to help point this out every single time we have seen it on the site. what we get is bashed, smashed, flamed and beaten up for picking on the newbie. I have seen way too many posts that have been down right hostile. people like cptcorn keep pointing it out no matter how much flaming has had to be endured and I admire that. maybe now, when it it pointed out that a person has made a profit off from some one else's property, the members who see nothing wrong with this will knock off the flaming and will remember this thread.

no one wants to see a person lose everything because of this...why the heck do you think people have tired over and over again to tell you? it is to help you, not be copyright police.

I know you feel bad but that one little statement that the people you did it for thougth it was amazing and the fact that you priced out clipart and found it too expensive makes me wonder just how much of all this you really are getting.

 

[astro8]

I know this thread has developed into one about copyright, but if that was my photo I'd be much more upset in the way it was used than without permission or payment.

Everyone except for Mr Freeman and Fred seem to be forgetting the nature of the photograph. If I was given that photo by the client I would of investigated it fully out of my own curiosity and then refused to use it.

Where the hell did he think these skulls came from? Answer me that? He must be a complete ignorant. That photo represents incomprehensible misery.

I knew where it came from the moment I saw it, a killing field. I know a lot of south-east asians and that could have been one of their parents remains depicted on the side of that guys truck.

I could make a lot of other comments and comparisons throughout our recent history that would get this thread instantly deleted because that's a 'no go zone' but I won't.

 

[iSign]

I'm sure the owner of the vehicle will have been high-five'd by the hand full of like minded friends in his inner circle.. but by now he will probably have been chastised by a few more influential people asking him WTF was he thinking... and by the time he learns (if he hasn't already) that it's gotta go... I'd not be surprised if the shock value wore off already & he'll be ecstatic that he get's a do-over.. bummer for stickasteve.. he was paid for design time, so now his client has a blank check for new design work, until satisfied...

 

[synergy_jim]

The biggest bummer in all of this, is the fact that a pile of skulls can be drawn in about an hour...... too many people in this business looking to make a quick buck with no talent....

 

[Fred Weiss]

The biggest bummer in all of this, is the fact that a pile of skulls can be drawn in about an hour...... too many people in this business looking to make a quick buck with no talent....

Or purchased legitimately for very little money.

 

[gabagoo]

Oddly enough, a friend just came in to see me and he had some questions for me about some material. He showed me this little piece of sintra 1/8" about 1.25" x 6". On the 2 samples one said Dunlop; and the other had a Budweiser logo. He told me he ordered them from some guy in England and had them shipped over.

He has been trying to get this race car miniature track business going for some time now. He wants to offer it for events and parties...etc. I told him how ironic it was that he wanted to make these himself, and was he going to get written permission to put miniature advetising around the track. I told him how this was a topic of conversation on the forum and he says.."These companies enjoy the free advertising"
I wasn't going to get into an argument with him, and he can cut them all himself with his crick cut if he wishes.

That is just the mind set that is out there. "FREE ADVERTISING"

 

[mikey-Oh]

foremost, i do not defend a wrap that did not succeed in communication or adhere to current law(s). that being said thank you signs101 for this thread that has generated/covered, 110 posts and last i checked 3,203 views. i'm at least responsible for 13 views or so, and continue to learn from our collective greater good. while i feel it important not infringing upon the law, the question of creative commons and internet attribution is a very important topic.

one of my top '09 documentaries. RiP: A Remix Manifesto
, while this may favor the musical side of fair use, it's an excellent examination of many topics covered/discussed in this thread.

 

[Bigdawg]

Very worthy of being a sticky note.... lots of good information and links in here.

 

[jiarby]

It raises a lot of questions about how much the original artists should be compensated. Should the owners open their books and show how much was made from that specific product?

Sounds Socialist to me....

do you mean that there should be some kind of limit on how successful someone can be selling their images?

 

[phototec]

Public domain?

Just a reality check here, the are some situations where the images can not be copyrighted, they are considered Public Domain, the tragedy in Cambodia may be one of those examples, the skulls were real people, not a tree or landscape. Did the photographer obtain permission to take the photo, model release from living relatives, I doubt it. Therefore the image may be considered Public Domain, see description:

The public domain is an intellectual property designation for the range of content that is not owned or controlled by anyone.These materials are "public property", and available for anyone to use freely for any purpose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

I'm certainly no expert, however the photo of stacked skulls in Cambodia may be considered public domain?

 

[Fred Weiss]

Just a reality check here, the are some situations where the images can not be copyrighted, they are considered Public Domain, the tragedy in Cambodia may be one of those examples, the skulls were real people, not a tree or landscape. Did the photographer obtain permission to take the photo, model release from living relatives, I doubt it. Therefore the image may be considered Public Domain, see description:

The public domain is an intellectual property designation for the range of content that is not owned or controlled by anyone.These materials are "public property", and available for anyone to use freely for any purpose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

I'm certainly no expert, however the photo of stacked skulls in Cambodia may be considered public domain?

Your arguments may or may not be so as to the original rights and procedures, but that does not give any other party any right to assume rights claimed by the artist are incorrect and that the other party can assume the work is in the public domain.

For example, the United States flag is in the public domain. But if I photograph it or draw it, the rights to that photograph or drawing are mine and I am entitled to whatever fees I can get through licensing the rights to reproduce it. In other words, my claim is to my photograph and not to the flag itself. In a fairly recent example, following the attacks of 9/11, there was a photograph taken by a newspaper photographer in New Jersey of three firefighters draping a flag over the front of a building. It became quite iconic and lots of people wanted to reproduce it but the newspaper was successful in enforcing its copyright to the photo.

 

[Marlene]

to put it so that it is simple, if you did not take the photo or buy the use of it, it is not yours. the same goes for drawn artwork. if in doubt just ask yourself the simple question, "did I buy the use of that or make it myself?" if the answer is "no" then don't use it. how much simplier can that be?


if you need to go deeper, Fred explained it very nicely

For example, the United States flag is in the public domain. But if I photograph it or draw it, the rights to that photograph or drawing are mine and I am entitled to whatever fees I can get through licensing the rights to reproduce it. In other words, my claim is to my photograph and not to the flag itself.

 

[cptcorn]

Sounds Socialist to me....

do you mean that there should be some kind of limit on how successful someone can be selling their images?

Pleas don't make this political. Of course there should be no limit on how successful someone can be selling their products.

That's not what I meant. I was asking, should there be a limit on how much someone can claim for damages. The person "opening the books" would be the offender.

Just a reality check here, the are some situations where the images can not be copyrighted, they are considered Public Domain, the tragedy in Cambodia may be one of those examples, the skulls were real people, not a tree or landscape. Did the photographer obtain permission to take the photo, model release from living relatives, I doubt it. Therefore the image may be considered Public Domain, see description:

The public domain is an intellectual property designation for the range of content that is not owned or controlled by anyone.These materials are "public property", and available for anyone to use freely for any purpose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

I'm certainly no expert, however the photo of stacked skulls in Cambodia may be considered public domain?

As far as I know there is almost zero public domain artwork that has been created in the 20th century. There is a lot of artwork that was commissioned by the United States that is in public domain. You'll have to search the Library of Congress. Even so, not everything that is in the Public Domain can be reproduced commercially, but much of it can.

 

[bob]

...
As far as I know there is almost zero public domain artwork that has been created in the 20th century...

Except, of course, for damn near everything created prior to 1964. Generally movies and music are religiously renewed but not so published material. Moreover, anything published before 1924 is in the public domain.

 

[mikey-Oh]

Except, of course, for damn near everything created prior to 1964. Generally movies and music are religiously renewed but not so published material. Moreover, anything published before 1924 is in the public domain.

except for the happy birthday song

 

[cptcorn]

Except, of course, for damn near everything created prior to 1964. Generally movies and music are religiously renewed but not so published material. Moreover, anything published before 1924 is in the public domain.

You are correct. I read what I read wrong, and misinterpreted it.