ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: jpm-pc on May 20, 2013, 10:17:19 AM
-
Has this Final Rule (www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2012/77fr40268.pdf (http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2012/77fr40268.pdf)) been analyzed on this forum yet? I looked and searched, but could not locate anything.
This rule appears to be trending towards adoption of the holdings in Muench, Bean, Alaska Stock, and Changa by requiring more information in the copyright application for Automated Databases that Predominantly Consist of Photographs where protection of the individual photos is to be included. The new rule now states and requires:
"the Copyright Office concludes that when a registration is made for a database consisting predominantly of photographs, and the copyright claim extends to the individual photographs themselves, each of those photographs must be included as part of the deposit accompanying the application."
More important, the discussion under the heading Other Issues, goes on to say that applicants/claimants are "advised that it is in their interest to specifically identify:
(1) the author of each of the component works, and
(2) for each author, the title of each of his or her component works on the application."
The text goes on to say "... applicants who do not specifically identify each author and title run the risk that their registrations will be considered not to extend to each work in the group. And regardless of the outcome of that litigation, specific identification of each author and title creates a more accurate and informative public record."
While not yet part of the law, this latter provision seems to be a clear indicator of the current mindset at the Copyright Office.
-
your link brings up a 404 not found error..I would like to see this and possibly comment if I can make heads or tails of it.
-
The link adds something after .pdf.
Delete that and you'll ge the document.
http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2012/77fr40268.pdf
-
It looks like the editor added some characters. Couch_Potato has it right or just copy-and-paste the following into your browser.
http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2012/77fr40268.pdf
-
...the copyright claim
extends to the individual photographs
themselves, each of those photographs
must be included as part of the deposit
accompanying the application. As the
Office has previously stated:
[T]he Office rejects the plea of at least one
commenter to permit the use of descriptive
identifying material in lieu of the actual
images.
Gee I wonder what commentator wanted this? It really makes sense in this day and age to describe a photo rather than provide a thumbnail. I guess the trolling industry would welcome anything that makes it harder for ordinary folks to track down whether an image is registered or not.
-
@Jerry -- note that the language you quote (re: actual image v. description) is not new and is actually from a prior rule that was published on July 17, 2001. Nonetheless, it is still accurate.
-
I thought I had discussed this before on this forum, but could not find my previous post. This shows that after analysis of the cases cited, the Copyright Office realizes that the Act requires what the courts said it does. Hopefully the decisions will stand up on appeal.