Copyright vs. Copywrong

Nancy Wolff makes a living as a copyright lawyer protecting the rights of artists and photographers. During her presentation at a recent PACA (Picture Council of America) event, she went through numerous examples where copyright infringement ended up costing the companies that were hauled into court many thousands of dollars. I don’t know about you but “going to court” is not why I got into this business.

(Gina Kelly, AP)
The recent story of an American couple that was shocked to find out their family photo was being used in a European grocery store ad without their permission is yet another example of ignorance of copyright law. In the news, this case has carried a humorous undertone, but other cases are not so benign.

In her presentation Ms. Wolff cites some popular copyright myths:

• If an image is on the internet it is in the public domain
• If there is no copyright notice on the image, I don’t need permission to use it
• If I don’t profit from the use, I don’t need permission to use it
• If I alter the image X%, I don’t need permission to use it
• If I only use part of the image, I don’t need permission to use it
• If I remove the image after notice, I don’t owe any money to the copyright

How many times have we heard (or said) one of these seemingly legitimate guidelines?

The bottom line is, when using images and artwork for commercial gain to promote a product, service or company, you can never be too careful. Do the research and make sure you have proper clearances for usage. That includes permission from the photographer or artist and releases from all recognizable people in the image. Not doing this is like planting a landmine that has the potential of blowing up a couple of months or years down the road.

So, have you planted any landmines lately?