No Protection for Short Phrase T-Shirts

FUNNY ASS SHIRT by Douglas Muth from Flickr (Creative Commons License)

I regularly get questions from people who sell shirts on Etsy, Café Press, or a similar website and they claim that another user is stealing their design. When I look more closely at the situation, I see all the person is selling is shirts with a short phrase, in a common font, and no other artwork or design elements. Many times, I have the unfortunate responsibility of telling them that there’s no intellectual property in their design, so there’s no infringement (that’s legalese for “stealing”).

No Copyright in Short Phrases
Copyright applies to original works of authorships when they are fixed in a tangible medium. A t-shirt is a tangible medium, and it’s possible to have an original work on a garment. However, short phrases aren’t original works, so the act of merely printing one on a shirt does not create a copyright-protected article.

If that’s all you’re selling – word or a phrase on a shirt – there’s likely nothing you can do (from a copyright perspective) to stop your competition from selling a shirt with the same phrase on it. If you look on any of these DIY shirt and craft sites, you’ll see the same phrases on shirts from different sellers. There’s no copyright protection for words, images, or phrases like “geek,” “reasonable person,” “Introverts Unite! Separately in your own homes,” and even more creative phrases like “terminally soulless douche canoe.”

The Anti-Titanic Shirt

This used to be less of a problem before we had Teespring, Zazzle, and sites that make it easy to create and sell shirts and whatnot. In the past, if you wanted to sell a shirt, you had design it, have it printed, and then sell them in shop or on the street, or if you had html skills, you could create a website and people could mail you a check for a shirt. That’s what my friend, Peter Shankman, did when he sold anti-Titanic shirts in 1998. He started selling them in Times Square and then sold them online. He was a success, in part, because he had no competition.

What Could be Infringement
Every t-shirt design on Etsy is not up for grabs. Copyright does not protect short phrases, but it does protect designs with original artwork on them. Additionally, copyright protects the images you post of your shirts on your site. If you see another seller using your photos, that would likely be infringement (assuming it’s your photo). Sending a DMCA takedown may be sufficient to get them removed from their online store.

The other thing to watch for is trademark infringement. A seller can use a short phrase as a trademark to brand their wares. They can also create a logo that they put on their products. If you see someone using your trademark or a mark that is similarly close to yours, that could be infringement and worth investigating.

Beat the Competition in the Marketplace
For anyone who is selling these types of shirts, the best way to deal with your competition is be better than they are. Give your customers a reason to buy from you than from another seller, or having it made at a t-shirt shop. It could be your prices, the quality of the garments, or something about your company that makes you more desirable than the others.

Beyond that, you may want to consider upping your t-shirt game by creating or purchasing designs that will be protected by the Copyright Act.

Copyright is an area of the law with many gray areas, so if you’re having legal issues regarding your copyright rights, you can contact me directly or an intellectual property lawyer in your community. I regularly post about copyright and other IP issues on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

How to have an Anonymous LLC

Anonymous by Poster Boy NYC from Flickr (Creative Commons License)

Here’s the easy answer: You don’t.

It may be impossible to own an LLC anonymously. There’s always a paper trail and financial records that eventually lead to you.

Burying Your Identity in Your LLC
Creating an LLC requires paperwork and money. The Articles of Organization that are filed with the State are public records. If you didn’t want to have your name on your company, you set up layers of companies that own companies that own your LLC so it would take longer to trace it back to you. You could also set up a blind trust where you are the beneficiary. That would keep your name off the public records, but there would still be documents somewhere that show the connection. (Because business filing are public records, I often recommend that clients not use their home address as their business address. There are many low-cost mailbox services.)

Even if your name is not on the company as an owner, there would still be the records of payments to you. It may require a court order for someone to gain access to this information, but it would be telling if the majority of payments from the company (or companies if you ran it through multiple entities) went to a single person.

When someone asks how to be an anonymous owner of a company, it raises a red flag for me about their motivations and their business activities. If a company or person is controversial or engaging in potentially malicious acts, it may raise enough eyebrows that someone will be motivated to take a closer look at its inner workings.

How to Run a Website Anonymously
Conversely, it may be possible to operate a website relatively anonymously. You would have to essentially divorce yourself from the website:

  • Use an email address for the website registration that isn’t otherwise connected to you. Don’t access this email using your phone.
  • Pay for the website with a pre-paid credit card.
  • Use a web hosting service that protects your information.
  • Only access the website using public wifi. Never access it from work or home.
  • Turn off your phone when working on your website – so the GPS in your phone will be turned off.
  • Consider using an app that masks or mocks your GPS location when you access the internet.

Even when you take all the precautions to be anonymous online, be prepared to be unmasked at anytime. Whatever you say anonymous, you best be ready to own it once your name and face are attached to it.

If you want a resource regarding the legal dos and don’ts regarding posts on the internet, please check out The Legal Side of Blogging: How Not to get Sued, Fired, Arrested, or Killed. If you need legal help regarding internet privacy, you can contact me directly or a social media lawyer in your community. I post about these issues on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

Trademarks: Register or Rebrand

WordPress Swag by Caspar Hübinger from Flickr (Creative Commons License)

One of my entrepreneur friends recently asked me if he “had to” register the logo for his company. I responded with, “How much would it suck if you had to rebrand?”

Why Register your Trademark
Your trademark is the name, logo, and other branding you put on your products so consumers can tell the difference between your brand and your competition’s. When you have a registered trademark for your brand, you can stop anyone from entering the market with a similar brand on a similar product as you. The law doesn’t like it when your competition tries to ride your coattails by looking too similar to your brand. When you register your trademark, your rights extend to everywhere in the United States, even if you’re not doing business everywhere in the country yet.

If you don’t register your brand, you can only get “common law” trademark rights that are limited to where you’re doing business with your mark. Your competition can use the same or similar brand where you haven’t established yourself. And if they register the brand before you, you may find yourself frozen only to your established marketplace, which may be quite small. Just ask the original Burger King restaurant what that’s like.

Cheaper than Rebranding
What does it cost to have a logo designed?
What about a website?

The fee to submit a trademark application to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is $225-400, if it’s only for one type of product or service. Even with the fee to have a proper trademark lawyer submit and track the application, it’s often cheaper to apply for a registered trademark instead of rebrand. If someone else registers your trademark before you, you may be forced to rebrand if you want to continue to grow your business and expand your marketplace to reach more potential customers.

Brand Theft Happens
I have seen and worked on a number of situations where a company could have avoided a lot of heartache and legal bills if they had registered their trademark, because their competition registered the same or similar trademark before they did. Turner Barr essentially had his trademark, Around the World in 80 Jobs, stolen out from under him. He had to cease operations to address the situation. Thankfully for him, his story had a happy ending. Other companies are not as lucky.

A substantial portion of my work involves analyzing, registering, and challenging trademarks. If you need help with your trademark situation, you can contact me directly. I also post about these issues on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

Contract Amendments – Always in Writing

Signature by Sebastien Wiertz from Flickr (Creative Commons License)

When a lawyer writes a contract for a client, it usually includes provisions that say that the all the terms of the agreement are contained in the document and all changes to the contract must be in writing. It may look something like this:

This Agreement is the entire understanding between the Parties concerning the subject of this Agreement. This Agreement replaces and supersedes any and all prior oral or written agreements and discussions between the Parties on that subject. All amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the Parties.

Contracts are relationship management documents. They keep everyone on the same page to prevent problems down the line or to help resolve problems when they occur. One of the challenges I encounter with contract clients is they often don’t follow the contract they signed and amend the agreement that is documented only in an email exchange, or worse, a undocumented verbal agreement.

Always Get It In Writing
The purpose of the “entire agreement” clause is to put all the terms of the contract in a single document. All written amendments should be stored with the original agreement – in hard copy and/or electronically, so if there is a question or dispute, the parties only need to review the single or amended document. They don’t have to piece together the contract from the parties’ communications and actions.

If you don’t get your amendments in writing, you’re asking for trouble. There could be confusion about what the change is, or worse, the other side could deny the existence of an amendment and screw you over. Remember, the law does not care about what you know, only what you can prove. If you don’t get your amendments in writing, and you have an “entire agreement” clause, if you have to go to court, the judge could say the amendment doesn’t exist.

Contract Amendments Can Be Easy
Why don’t people put their contract amendments in writing. I suspect it’s because they think it will be a hassle, cause a delay in a project, be time-consuming, or maybe they don’t even think to put in it writing because “it’s not a big deal.” In general, contracts exist, not for when things go right, but when they go wrong. What you think is a minor verbal change when both sides are getting along can become a big problem if things turn sour.

If you spend $100s or $1,000s to have a lawyer draft your contract, don’t revise it without their involvement. You’ve invested time and money to protect your interests. You don’t want to inadvertently throw that away with a damaging and undocumented revision.

Contracts are your Friends
These are some of my guidelines when it comes to reading and drafting contracts:

  • Never sign a contract you don’t understand. Don’t be afraid to ask for clarification.
  • Whomever writes a contract does so for their or their client’s benefit. Keep that in mind when a contract is written by the other side. (Lawyers have an obligation to represent their clients zealously.)
  • Substantial business contracts should always be reviewed by a lawyer to ensure it’s complete and protects your interests.

A contract should be written to protect everyone involved – to make sure everyone understands and agrees to the same course of action.

I’m constantly reviewing and drafting all types of contracts for clients. If you want to keep up with what I’m doing or if you need help, you can contact me directly or connect with me on TwitterFacebookYouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

Legal Issues with Open Photoshoots

Parkwood Photography Studios, used with permission

Last week, I went to an open photoshoot/happy hour at Parkwood Studios. (They have a gorgeous space!) It’s a free monthly event for photographers and models of all skill levels and experience. There was an area set up with lights where anyone could model and shoot photos. The purpose is to give everyone an introductory experience working with a model in a studio environment. There was not a model release or TFP agreement for this event.

I went to this to network and to model. As a lawyer, I knew what I was getting into in regards to copyright and image rights. Of course, my analytical brain couldn’t stop strategizing what I’d do to integrate legal protection and information without disturbing the spirit of the event.

Who’s At Risk, Who’s Protected
There are three groups who should be interested in protecting themselves at an open shoot: the models, the photographers, and the studio. If I represented a studio that hosted an open shoot, I’d recommend having a release that states the studio is not responsible for anyone’s behavior. If there’s a dispute between a model and a photographer, that’s an issue to be resolved between the two of them.

One of my images from the open shoot. I look like a action hero.

Model Release and Copyright Notice
Even in the photography/modeling industry, a lot of people do not understand copyright and image rights. In an open photo shoot, the model and photographer exchange their time, talents, and the opportunity to practice their respective crafts. Unless stated otherwise in a written agreement, whomever took the photo owns the copyright.

The expectation at these events is that photographers and models exchange contact information so the photographer can share images with them, and that the models are allowed to put the images in their portfolios or share on social media. I suspect the studio would also want a license to the use any images taken at the event that they receive or that are posted to their social media to promote future events or the studio.

No Guarantees
The one of the complaint I heard from past events is models saying a photographers who took photos of them never sent any images. While that is poor form, the only way I can think to legally work around this is to have a “no guarantee” clause. There’s no guarantee the photographer will send the model photos and there’s no guarantee the photographer will get the shot they want.

Code of Conduct
Since this is an event for all experience levels – including fledglings – I recommend having a code of conduct that applies to everyone and the studio’s equipment. This would include basic things like “Always ask permission before touching a model,” “Don’t touch the lights or any equipment that’s not set up for use at this shoot,” “Give constructive feedback,” and “Be respectful – we’re all here to learn and have fun.” A lot of these are common sense, but it’s good to state the obvious for people for whom it might be their first time shooting in this type of environment.

For studios like Parkwood that host regular events, I suggest creating reusable poster-sized copies of the rules and release and put it on the door leading to the photoshoot area with a notice that says by entering the room, you agree to these expectations. For anyone who wants to shoot photos or model, put a clipboard with a dated copy of the agreement and a signature page where everyone must agree to the rules before they’re allowed to participate. This serves multiple purposes:

  • It gives photographers and models experience with reading and signing these agreements.
  • It creates expectations and helps avoid conflict for all involved.

I get questions every day about photography, image rights, and copyright. For anyone who works as a photographer or model, it’s imperative that you understand these topics. Many disputes can be avoided with well-written contracts and accurate information. I’m constantly doing work in this area, so if you want to keep up with what I’m doing or if you need help, you can contact me directly or connect with me on TwitterFacebookYouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

Lights Camera Lawsuit

There’s always a need for quality legal information for photographers. That’s why I created an online course called Lights Camera Lawsuit: The Legal Side of Professional Photography to address photographers’ most important questions. I want you to feel secure in your business, confident in the way you operate day-to-day, knowing that you’ve set yourself up to get paid what your worth without incident.

At $497, the course contains nearly six hours of legal information you can immediately apply to your business. That’s less than what I charge for two hours of legal work for clients!  

Please subscribe for more information and to make sure you don’t miss out on any special offers or discounts.

Lawsuit Filed to Unmask Anonymous Penis Sender

Don’t Mess with Texas by Jamie from Flickr (Creative Commons License)

Last week, Melody Lenox filed a lawsuit in Dallas County, Texas for a court order to determine who sent her a penis-shaped gummy candies via Dicks By Mail.

At first, this sounded like an extreme reaction. If someone spent $15 to send me candy via mail with a note that says “Eat a Bag of Dicks,” I’d probably laugh, and then eat them – because gummy candies are delicious. However, learning about the larger context of the situation, Lenox’s reaction seems reasonable.

The Bigger Story
Lenox is the head of human resources at Axxess Technology Solutions, a position that requires her to be the bearer of bad news to some employees. Prior to this unsolicited dick package, she allegedly had her car keyed and was the target of fake posts on Craigslist. She asserts that these acts are related.

In this context, pursuing a harassment lawsuit against the sender of these candies (assuming the same person(s) are committing these acts), makes sense. Ongoing acts like this are unacceptable.

What I suspect is happening in this case is Lenox filed a lawsuit against John Doe and then requested a court order to get the purchase information from Dicks By Mail. (Many companies have privacy policies that state they’ll protect your information unless they are required to provide it in response to a court order.) While it’s easy to key a car or post a fake Craigslist post anonymously, sending candy by mail requires a credit card, which will eventually lead to a real person – the suspected harasser.

Unmasking the Anonymous
Anytime you do something anonymously, be prepared to be unmasked. When you act anonymously online, there’s always a digital paper trail that shows the IP address of the internet connection used, the GPS location of your smartphone, the profile information of an anonymous website or social media profile, and in this case, the credit card information used for the transaction.

There have been plenty of situations where a person lost their job or found themselves in a lawsuit when their anonymous persona was unmasked. Using the internet is not an effective way to maintain your anonymity – unless you have mad skills in this area. (And if you have to question whether you have mad skills, you don’t.)

More about Dicks By Mail

Photo from Dicks By Mail

Dicks By Mail is a hilarious way to send a light-hearted sugar-filled message. The company does not endorse the use of their service to threaten or bully someone. If you receive Dicks By Mail it should only be for two reasons: “[S]omeone thinks you’re either a dick or wanted you to laugh!”

And they do caution people who come to the site with vindictive intent: If you are sending this with the intent to ruin someone’s day, then maybe it’s you who needs to eat a bag of dicks.”

In case you were wondering, yes, Dicks By Mail is a U.S.-based business, so if you want to stimulate the economy while telling your elected officials what you think of them, this may be a creative way to send a message (though, it may not be effective since they won’t know it came from a constituent).

The laws that apply to the internet are constantly evolving as the courts are encountering more internet-based problems. If you want to connect with me to keep up with my thoughts about social media law, you can contact me directly or connect with me on TwitterFacebookYouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

Copyright License for Commissioned Art

“and the years have wings, detail” by Olivia Kirby from Flickr (Creative Commons License)

There are services that will print your photos and other artwork onto canvas – even in Walgreens. I recently heard of a situation where a customer commissioned an artist to create a portrait. The artist created the work and sent it to the customer as a JPG file, that the customer could use to get it printed onto paper or canvas. This may be a more efficient and cost-effective way for artists to create original pieces for customers.

The customer took the image to be printed on canvas, and the photo processor refused to do it without a release from the artist. I’d never heard of a printer requiring this, but the customer encountered this problem when they tried to use two different printers. To avoid such problems and delays in the future, the artist should provide a license with the JPG file for printing in case the customer is required to provide it.

Photo Processors and Copyright Infringement
Should photo processors be concerned about customers using their services to make unlawful copies of another person’s work? Probably not. I suspect a customer that comes in with a JPG to create one photo product is likely not committing copyright infringement. Of course, there’s an exception for art that is so well-known that a reasonable person would recognize the likelihood of infringement.

One way a photo processor could protect themselves from accusations of contributory copyright infringement would be to include a check box on the order form where the customer attests that they own or have permission to use the image in this way and indemnify the photo processor in the event of infringement lawsuit and with reimbursement for all related costs and damages. I know the company I use to print my custom t-shirts has this on their order forms.

License for Commissioned Work
This problem sounds like it’s easy to fix: the artist can add a licensing provision to the agreement that specifies upon payment in full, the customer will receive a JPG of the work and a license for how the customer may use it. That provision can specify that the artist retains ownership of the copyright and the customer may have the unaltered JPG printed on paper, canvas, and any other permitted medium for personal use (which may involve soliciting the services of a third party printer). That should hopefully be enough to satisfy the concerns of any printing service.

The artist may want to add other licensing terms, such as it’s a non-exclusive, paid-in-full, royalty-free license, whether the license is perpetual or time limited, how many prints the customer may make, and any other permissions or restrictions the artist wants to impose of their work. An intellectual property lawyer can provide more information about what provisions to include in such an agreement.

I was surprised to hear about this situation, especially if the customer only asked for one print. I would expect the order to be more extreme to raise a red flag for a printer, but on the other hand, I’m pleased to see printers being mindful about what they’re being asked to create. The laws and rights related to intellectual property are complicated and always situation-dependent. If you want to connect with me about your intellectual property rights as a consumer or an artist, you can contact me directly or connect with me on TwitterFacebookYouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

Using Movie Clips in your YouTube Videos

Wedding Crashers by Kurt Bauschardt from Flickr (Creative Commons license)

Some people incorporate clips from mainstream movies into their YouTube videos. Depending on the circumstances, it may or may not be legal.

Movie Studio’s Rights
Whoever owns the copyright in the movie has the exclusive right to control where the work can be copied, distributed, displayed, performed, and what derivative works can be made from it. This applies to the whole film and clips of it. The copyright owner is also the only one who can come after someone for copyright infringement. So, if they don’t know or don’t care about what another person is doing with their work, that person will never get in trouble.

What about Fair Use?
The powers that wrote the Copyright Act understood that existing artwork inspire other artists to create new works. To that effect, they created the fair use provision of the copyright law (17 U.S.C. § 107 if you want to look it up).

The fair use law allows a person to use another’s work for the purpose of criticism, commentary, research, and teaching – often in ways that thoughtfully add to the existing work. The law provides four factors that the court may consider in determining whether a use is copyright infringement or fair use (which I turned into the handy mnemonic device PAIN), but these are merely points of consideration.

The fair use factors are not a mathematical equation to use to get a definite answer. The only way to know for certain if a use qualifies as fair use would be if there’s a lawsuit and the court makes a ruling on the matter. However, if the use of another’s work is transformative and doesn’t become a substitute for the original work in the market, there’s a good chance it’s fair use.

One way to avoid the issue about whether using a clip is copyright infringement or fair use, would be to get permission to use the clip by purchasing a license. Without this permission, there’s a risk that the copyright owner will order your video to be removed until the offending clip is removed.

Using a Movie Clip – Good Idea or Bad Idea?
If a client asked me about using a movie clip for a purpose other than criticism, commentary, as a teaching demonstrative, or an original compilation with other works, I’d challenge them to explain why they want to use that clip and what value it adds to their work. I’d also encourage them to at least do their homework on the copyright owner to see if they have a track record of going after people who use clips of their work without permission.

Ultimately, I respect my clients’ choices, but I try to help them make informed decisions about the risk they’re accepting when they use another’s work. Copyright and fair use situations are always complicated and always depend on the specific circumstances. If you want to connect with me and hear more thoughts about copyright, you can contact me directly or connect with me on TwitterFacebookYouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

Year-End Visit to the Accountant

Money Tunnel by Lomo-Cam from Flickr (Creative Commons License)

Every business owner needs an accountant, and a good accountant is worth their weight in gold.

I’ve been saying that for years. Actually, I recommend visiting your accountant twice a year – once during tax season and once at the end of the year. And just to show I “eat my own dog food,” I wanted to share my experience seeing my accountant this fall.

Planning Ahead for Next Year’s Taxes
Visiting my accountant is a great way to begin the process of winding down the year. I brought him a copy of my Quickbooks. (I’m probably his only client who keeps their USB on a Star Trek key chain.) He did a quick review my books for the year to date, made sure everything is categorized properly, and he gave me an estimate of what I should expect to pay in taxes come next April. (I don’t get upset when I have to pay taxes. It means I made money.) I find it reassuring that my tax bill isn’t a big mystery looming in the future. With his estimate, I can budget in my expected tax bill starting December or January.

Avoid the Tax Season Insanity
When I meet with my accountant in November/December, we get to have a laid back conversation about my business for the last year and what’s on the horizon for the next year. This gives him a chance to provide more thoughtful advice since he’s not in the middle of the insanity of tax season. Meeting before the end of the year gives him a chance to give me any advice regarding an end-of-the-year spend-down or if I have a big purchase coming up, whether it matters which tax year it happens.

Connecting with a Fellow Entrepreneur
My accountant is also a fellow entrepreneur who meets with other entrepreneurs for a living. When I share my ideas for my business with him, he gives me suggestions from his own experience and from watching what’s worked for other clients.

I’m always happy to meet with my accountant and never flinch at paying his bill. If you haven’t scheduled your year-end meeting with your accountant, I strongly recommend it. If you don’t have an accountant for your business, get a referral from a trusted professional. Your accountant is your partner for your success.  If you want to connect with me and my thoughts about why every entrepreneur needs an accountant, you can contact me directly or connect with me on TwitterFacebookYouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

Getty Images Skirts $1B Lawsuit

Victory by Quinn Dombrowski from Flickr (Creative Commons License)

Victory by Quinn Dombrowski from Flickr (Creative Commons License)

Earlier this year, Getty Images was sued for $1 billion (yes, that’s billion) by photographer Carol Highsmith.

Getty Images had sent Highsmith a letter and a bill, claiming that she was using one of their images without buying the requisite license. (Getty’s known for doing this.) It turns out Getty sent her a bill for using an image that she had taken herself. In fact, Getty was selling licenses for thousands of her images. Highsmith responded by suing Getty for $1 billion for violating her rights under the Federal Copyright Act and state level laws related to licensing.

Highsmith donated over eighteen thousand images to the Library of Congress and made available to others to copy and display for free starting in 1988. Her claims were based on the fact that Getty used her work without attribution and added their own watermark. In my previous post about this case, you can see the math that shows that $1B is a reasonable amount to request for damages given the number of photos in question.

I previously wrote that this will be a fun case to watch, assuming it goes to trial and doesn’t end a settlement with a non-disclosure agreement. But alas, it wasn’t meant to be.

The Court granted Getty and the other Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the federal claims, leaving on the state-level claims in the case. The Parties apparently came to an agreement amongst themselves, with a non-disclosure provision, and stipulated to having the remaining claims dismissed with prejudice (meaning Highsmith can’t file this lawsuit again for these claims). The dismissal also directs each side to be responsible for their own attorneys’ fees and costs.

Judge Rakoff wrote that he will release a memorandum explaining his ruling “in due course.” I expect it will be an interesting read.

I feel for Highsmith. Not only did she feel like her rights were violated, but the Court disagreed with her and told her she had to pay her attorneys’ fees. That’s the risk a person runs when they pursue a lawsuit – the Court could say you’re wrong, and you had to pay possibly thousands or tens of thousands of dollars to get that answer.

So what does this mean for future cases that are similar to this? It’s hard to say, though it appears that the fact that Highsmith made her work available for public use impacted her argument that she had rights in the images in question. I don’t expect this to effect artists who retain their copyright rights and make their work available for free through Creative Commons and similar means. (Thank you to all the artists who do this. I am forever grateful for your generosity.)

There are a lot of issues that come into play surrounding photography, image rights, and copyright. If you want to chat more about these topics, you can contact me directly or connect with me on TwitterFacebookYouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.