On 12/10/02 3:09:56 PM, Michiko Stehrenberger wrote:
>Okay, yes, I understand - but
>I'm not saying you can
>retroactively get an infringer
>here. I'm saying (and I hope
>you'd agree this is true?)
>that you can register new
>images prior to publishing
>them to get the 'unpublished'
>discount of $30 for the group.
images registered prior to publication--new or old, or both together, as long as all
of them are unpublished--can be group registered, on a single form for a single fee.
>Then, after you clear the
>Copyright registration a few
>days later (using your Fedex
>proof of delivery as your
>temporary 'registration date'
>which will appear on your
>later) you 'publish' them on
>your site by offering them as
>stock, so that any potential
>infringements which occur
>would occur on work that is
Correct. Once you know the registration is in hand at the Copyright Office, you can publish them when and as you please, with the reasonable assumption that they are protected--the proof being when the certificate returns.
>I think you wrote that if an
>infringement occurs on work which has
>not been published, that the copyright
>owner would not be eligible for
>statutory damages and legal fees, and so
>based on that I was suggesting we could
>immediately offer up images as stock on
>our sites as a way to get them published
>right away (and eligible) as soon as
Please note the correction in the self-promo thread, and my amplifications on the same theme in the duplicate of this thread. Statutory damages can be claimed for:
1) Any unpublished work that has been registered prior to infringement
2) Any published work that has been registered prior to infringement
3) Any published work that has been registered post-infringement
, provided that the infringement AND the registration occur in the three-month window following the FIRST publication of the image.
>I'm definitely referring to new images
>being registered, and of publishing them
>after the copyright registration is
>filed, to protect against infringements
>from that moment forward - so am I not
>understanding something here?
>My focus on publication is because an
>earlier post of yours seemed to indicate
>that an image stolen that was never
>published (i.e. stolen from a self-promo
>piece, etc.) would not be eligible for
>statutory damages and legal fees, even
>if that image had been registered prior
>to the infringement happening.
Note the previous part of my answer immediately above.
>Also, for those of us (I think there are
>a lot of us) who are deterred from
>registration because published images
>would need to be registered one at a
>time, for $30...and I'm trying to find a
>less intimidating way to register
>several at once, and at a 'discount'
>and it seems to make sense that
>registering a bunch of unpublished
>images at the same time would ease the
>process. Does that make sense?
Yes. It makes sense to register as much unpublished work in a group as possible, and to go back and group-register old editorial work (contributions to periodicals) in one-year lots using a Form VA, Form GR/CP, a Form CON if you need more space, and a SINGLE $30 fee.
>Did I misunderstand somehow? That's why
>I've been focusing on the publication
>issue as it relates to eligibility for
>statutory damages and legal fees. Hope
>that makes sense.
I think the above should clear things up for you.
Daniel Abraham, Esq.
DISCLAIMER: Material posted on the Legal Easel™ chatboard discusses general principles of law in response to issues of concern to the illustration community. Nothing in this website or the Legal Easel™ chatboard should be construed to be a substitute for advice of counsel regarding the specific facts and circumstances of an individual case. Laws and their interpretation differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Legal advice addressing a specific situation should be sought from an attorney duly licensed in the appropriate jurisdiction.