I put a photo of one of my 3 Nikon D50s up so you can see how the updates sometimes creates issues. It has the correct purchase date, but the registration date is well after I sold it.It is the update date not the real registration date which would have been before I sold it. Verizon did a system update in the west that put down service for several states and tens of thousands of users because the update was not done properly.
I have redone a couple of things in the articles to make them easier to understand for those who are learning English. I do have to keep reminding myself that many are not here in the states. That is not really a good excuse because many of the people in this country have the problem of not understanding what they read. I will try to be clearer in how I write things.
For those who ask, I am not “after” the infringers. I am trying to stop them from expanding and doing so with my and others work. If you do not stop them, they will continue. Penalties, fines and damages are about all people like that will respond to. That is why the laws are written to punish them that way. Putting them in jail is an option but only for the most blatant ones. I have billed some and the ones billed and who do not pay, they will be pursued in civil court and then the copyright system. Keep in mind, that if the people are going into a more serious phase, they are going there because they choose not correct their created issue. If others have to fix your problem you should have to pay them for doing it. Once things get started there will be a lot of money involved as people deserve to be compensated for their time to fix the problems created by the infringers.
Most of the people who are the more serious infringers will try to find a way around it. The others will stand up and fix it. I have had many do that. The ones that just ignore it or try to get around the fact, they will pay the price. They are the ones that have to be stopped at all costs. They are the ones that probably have done it their whole lives and think it is OK. They seem to think that they can find something to say I did or others did that allows them to break the law. Reminds me of a small child that get caught and they point to someone else and says they did something so I can do this. Infringing is not pardoned because the creator of the work did something even if they think it gives them an excuse. They do not realize that they are on the verge of being added to a new nationwide and worldwide registry of copyright offenders. One thing you need to know, fair use is strictly a US idea. The rest of the world does not recognize it, so if they take something from a creator from overseas, they cannot hide.
Many of the articles have additional information in them concerning other articles. It is a working list of articles. So as some of you are taking notes, you are only getting some of the information and incomplete context if you do not read all the articles and the magazine. Make sure you at least scan all the articles. I will do updates and other items usually at the end of articles. I very seldom go back and make changes as the readership does not go back and read the articles over again normally. I put new information in the new articles and some information may not be in the title.
Friday was an interesting day to say the least. Things are progressing. I hope to hear something in the next few days as to whether things need to get more serious. If you are going to pursue computer fraud and identify fraud like happened at GoDaddy and Nikon than you need to be very sure before you proceed. This could very easily be one of the infringers or it could be a 14 year old in Korea hacking the sites. It will be interesting to see if we can get to the bottom of it. To answer the questions, if it is one of the hackers they probably just guaranteed a major loss and jail time. Let us hope it is a kid somewhere that needs their hands slapped. In reality, this was not a random act especially since the other site was also violated. I am just glad my IP is pretty unique and it is fairly easy to remove my computer from the list of computers that even visited the site.
I know I use the word creator. That is what artists do. They create works out of their minds; even good photographers see it in their mind first. Then you shoot and edit to make it yours. More and more people are seeing this as creators against takers. Infringers take things, they do not create. Creators create works and try to share them in a manner that they want. The infringers just take. That is what they do and who they are. You will find very few infringers who have created anything of value. If they did and someone stole it, they would then understand.
To the person asking questions about work for hire type of infringement in the UK. First I have no idea about the rules and laws over there. I am assuming you have an issue with some photos concerning the US laws. Here, the first thing to do is figure out who actually owns the copyright. You have a situation not unlike some of my work had for a while. If the photos are taken with company leased or owned equipment, they probably belong to the company unless you state it in writing differently.
Most companies and mine included have an intellectual property clause in the rules somewhere. I think the attorneys bury them on purpose. Now the issue that came up for me was that copyrights were done for hire by the rules and I never even considered that and neither did the other party. They will claim ignorance. It does no difference. The company by default owned the copyrights. Circumstances later required the company be closed. By law, the copyrights had to be assigned. Both parties were informed and also sent notices that if they did not file for the copyrights they would be considered the property of the company. My understanding is that they were notified a couple of times about it and failed to respond. So when the company was closed, the copyrights had to be assigned by the rules of the state and the corporation. So here in the States, if someone wants to file for a copyright or a claim against one of those images, they would need to have the files adjudicated.
They gave up the rights to them when they did not claim them when they were notified. In other words, they hold no copyrights on any of the images. They have the images and files which is a huge issue for them because they were notified and asked to return them. Failing to respond was a huge mistake. The copyrights were assigned by an act of law which removes any claim to them other than the person or entity that they were assigned.
In your case, since both parties are claiming them and the company probably has a for hire clause, you need to talk to an attorney. You and your cousin should work this out without attorneys because the cost to adjudicate it could be several thousand pounds and all that does is give ownership. Then the other part starts. Here in the states when I checked you would have a very hard time collecting anything on something the ownership was not clear on at the time of publishing, especially since they were used in an educational brochure. Registration over here removes that problem. The ownership here is established by the assignment under the law.
Fair use comes in over here and that means even if you owned them; you probably have no case anyway being used in an educational brochure. We have very strict laws on registration and doing it while ownership is in question is illegal. You get in far more trouble doing that then paying a willful infringement. You are defrauding the federal government. Bad idea. Over there, I have no idea what all the issues are.
Hope this helps but I again state to you that I know nothing about the rules over there so get an attorney that does.
Disclaimer: I am not an attorney. These are my personal opinions and general information only. These
are not legal advice and should not be used as such.