Copyright Claims to become MORE difficult, MORE expensive and take LONGER to resolve

Copyright Claims to become MORE difficult, MORE expensive and take LONGER to resolve

Stumbled upon the news today that unfortunately, to the great detriment of any caring professional photographer, videographer creator etc.

The National Law Review and The Phoblographer

Apparently, the U.S. copyright claims process is set to become MORE difficult, MORE expensive and take a LONGER time to resolve. Personally, I've never fully gone down the legal route on my own, only as far as genuinely threatening with it which has sufficed and used proxies in the form of the likes of Pixsy, Image Rights etc. 

Obviously, developments such as this probably will affect genuine threats, making them weaker and less likely to succeed in resolving matters without having to go to court.

New U.S. Supreme Court ruling

"The U.S. Supreme Court held today that bringing a suit for copyright infringement requires that the infringed work actually be registered with the U.S. Copyright Office, and that a mere application for registration will not suffice." 

Source: U.S. Supreme Court Holds That Copyrights Must Be Registered before Plaintiffs Can File Infringement Suits (5th of March, 2019 - The National Law Review)

Months of waiting before legal proceedings

"In the past if you had noticed that your work had been taken illegally you could register a copyright for your work, and then you could start proceedings against party who infringed on your property, but a new U.S Supreme court ruling has changed all of that....the gist of it is that if you don’t have a currently registered copyright on your work (not just photographs, but anything) you cannot claim infringement against those who may have wronged you...in the past if you found your work had been stolen you could go through the motions to register a copyright and then you could file a suit, but now you may have to wait months before you can start legal proceedings as the application for the copyright must be completed and not just be on file." 

Source: Making Copyright Infringement Claims is Now Harder for Photographers (8th of March, 2019 - The Phoblographer)

Trying something new...part one

So nice to be back on the blog again, fully admit that it was too long since the last time - apologies! 

Anyway, reason for "absence" is of course that I've been busy doing other things. So what have I been up to? Besides enjoying the last few weeks of summer holiday with my kids and for them also being back in school for a month or so, I also, purely by chance, explored a new possibility within my photographic business.

First we need to step back in time a few months to spring 2018, because that is where it all began. My daughter was about to graduate 9th grade and her class wanted to do something fun, hopefully get a lasting memory etc. My daughter, after checking with me as the good girl she is, volunteered my services as a photographer to come and take a dressing up/outrageous group portrait of her class - I think the theme to dress up like a character from a movie. So I did this with great success - happy students and teacher(s) etc. It was quite a bit of fun and I did enjoy it. Since then, my daughter, as well as comments from a few of her friends have been - oh you should be the school photographer, you'd be great at it etc. Loving the compliments of course, but put it in the back of my head.

Anyway, it was very recently, I got an e-mail from LinkedIn with a listing of potential jobs - I usually don't pay them much attention, but something caught my eye - a company looking for a school photographer in Gothenburg, which is not far away from where I live. So I clicked the link, got some pretty brief info about what it entailed and that they were looking for not just photographers, but suitable people on an hourly/part-time/full-time basis. There was a mention of a preference for "proper" photographers. So I hit the apply button, wrote a few lines, sent a long my CV etc.

Why was I even doing this one might ask? Well, my job can be lonely sometimes, even though I'm ok with that part. It is also important to not get stuck in the same "tracks" too deep so to speak, but to keep challenge yourself, and I wouldn't mind a part time job on the side for the supplemental income/additional revenue stream, social aspect or just to be doing something different at times - see this as potentially benefiting me in my main focus area.

So after having sent off my application the whole thing pretty much vanished from my brain. I was late in the application process, the year's training week had already been and so had the practical guidance period been - don't know why it still had a few days remaining open for application to be honest? 

Check back in a few days for the next part...

Ready for action!

PS. There was going to be a 2nd part to this story, but time passed and it now feels irrelevant, so there won't be one. In essence, got offered the job, but it was way way different to whatever I was potentially looking for and I wouldn't be able to fit it in to our life.

GDPR, Prohibited Photography - why all the hate?

GDPR, Prohibited Photography - why all the hate?

Seriously, what is going on with the perception of photography at the moment and going back a few years? I see this change in perception of photographers and photography towards something of a threat. I don't recall having read anything in conjunction with any terror events that they were keen photographers and did recon with anything more than a mobile phone, certainly not professional grade equipment such as a dSLR and big white Canon L lenses. For some reason people have developed this intense need to be "private" wherever they go, even in public places. I'm worried. Photography and documentary street photography is an integral part to have a record of everyday history, as well as capturing historic events and without it, or a reduction of it, will result in something of a historic blank canvas - we can't have that! 

At THIS end of school celebration I was NOT informed about

any prohibition against photography, and obviously they are

all posing for photographs... I'm sure all parents and relatives

take pictures for posterity, sharing it here there and everywhere

like one SHOULD do! Out of courtesy rather then necessity
I've blurred the children in the image. 

Going to the kids' end of school celebration this year and having been to a few (at least 15) this was the first time that I heard at one of them (not the one pictured in this post) that photography wasn't allowed of anything bar ONLY your own child. I have no interest in other kids more than that they are classmates, they are there and therefore part of that moment and setting so to exclude them will not just be difficult but also paint an inaccurate picture of the moment. 

I don't mind my children or myself ending up on someone else's camera, as long as there are no malicious intent. Anyway I have no malicious intentions and I do consider myself a protector of this art, industry and profession that is photography so there are very few situations where I agree with photography prohibition - so smile peeps when I take your picture, don't get angry, take is as a compliment and remember the importance of it all. Pervs and people with bad intentions are always going to try and do what they set out to do, probably sneakily and prohibition of photography won't matter to them. 

So how is GDPR going to affect me? I believe that I'm exempt as I'm either taking images and video for artistic reasons, for journalistic (editorial) purposes or purely private purposes. Of course I also do it for commercial purposes, but in those circumstances I exercise full control of the situation/setting/subject and ensure that the imagery is fully released - which is also a criteria to be able to license it for commercial purposes through my agents and/or stock libraries.