Copyright images used on YouTube "The Elecraft Band" without permission

[Dave, G4AON]

There are two videos currently on YouTube which use a sequence of
Elecraft related still images taken from various web sites. Some are
from my site and used without permission.

Other web site owners may wish to check out "The Elecraft Band" and "The
Elecraft Band II" by LU1DZ on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adAlnXZlheA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UI9fiGNXxg

73 Dave, G4AON
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Doug Faunt N6TQS [phone]]

Shame!

And he even missed two of the better images I've seen- the one on the
wall of Bush House, and the one from N8S.

How many of you know where the two beach house photos near the end
were taken?  Have been there?  Have operated from there?

73, doug

   Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 22:35:10 +0100
   From: Dave G4AON <[hidden email]>

   There are two videos currently on YouTube which use a sequence of
   Elecraft related still images taken from various web sites. Some are
   from my site and used without permission.

   Other web site owners may wish to check out "The Elecraft Band" and "The
   Elecraft Band II" by LU1DZ on YouTube:
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adAlnXZlheA
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UI9fiGNXxg

   73 Dave, G4AON
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Charly]

The status of copyright on open sites on the Web are a good question. The old (prior to Internet) rule was easy.... any work given away to the public lost its copyright protection. Example: a poet hands out copies of his poetry to public on a street corner. He loses his copyright then and there. I think the same applies to open sites where all the material is offered "free" to the public... that is, no payment back to the originator. The attachment of the C in a circle and the correct words of Copyright, name, and date, may provide some protection, but even then the excerpt taken must be substantial and not trivial (usually determined by shortness or length of excerpt). Citation of the original in short bits of the original likely also cover the possibly offending user. Basically, anything on the Web in open public sites can be used with very small danger of legal action against the copier-person. Further, the original owner must often prove MEASURABLE damages from the copying.... not easy in many cases. Consult your lawyer. 73 Charles Harpole [hidden email] Charles [hidden email] > Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 18:05:44 -0400> From: [hidden email]> To: [hidden email]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Copyright images used on YouTube "The Elecraft Band" without permission> CC: [hidden email]> > Shame!> > And he even missed two of the better images I've seen- the one on the> wall of Bush House, and the one from N8S.> > How many of you know where the two beach house photos near the end> were taken? Have been there? Have operated from there?> > 73, doug> > Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 22:35:10 +0100> From: Dave G4AON <[hidden email]>> > There are two videos currently on YouTube which use a sequence of > Elecraft related still images taken from various web sites. Some are > from my site and used without permission.> > Other web site owners may wish to check out "The Elecraft Band" and "The > Elecraft Band II" by LU1DZ on YouTube:> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adAlnXZlheA> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UI9fiGNXxg> > 73 Dave, G4AON> _______________________________________________> Elecraft mailing list> Post to: [hidden email]> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Julian, G4ILO]

HS0ZCW wrote

The status of copyright on open sites on the Web are a good question. The old (prior to Internet) rule was easy.... any work given away to the public lost its copyright protection. Example: a poet hands out copies of his poetry to public on a street corner. He loses his copyright then and there. I think the same applies to open sites where all the material is offered "free" to the public... that is, no payment back to the originator. The attachment of the C in a circle and the correct words of Copyright, name, and date, may provide some protection, but even then the excerpt taken must be substantial and not trivial (usually determined by shortness or length of excerpt). Citation of the original in short bits of the original likely also cover the possibly offending user. Basically, anything on the Web in open public sites can be used with very small danger of legal action against the copier-person. Further, the original owner must often prove MEASURABLE damages from the copying.... not easy in many cases. Consult your lawyer. 73 Charles Harpole [e-mail] Charles [e-mail]

I have "Copyright © 1998 - 2007 Julian Moss, G4ILO" in the footer of every page of my website. But this is mainly to discourage blatant rip-offs of my material. Some people have copied whole articles from my site, and even linked direct to the images. I really don't have an issue with a fellow hobbyist using pictures from my site (though an email asking permission would be a nice courtesy) but direct linking to files really annoys me because it uses my bandwidth which costs me money.

[David Woolley (E.L)]

Charles Harpole wrote:
> The status of copyright on open sites on the Web are a good question.
> The old (prior to Internet) rule was easy.... any work given away to
> the public lost its copyright protection. Example: a poet hands out

I don't believe this has been true since the USA signed the Berne
Convention, and used to be a US specific problem.  Incidentally, for
uniform international protection, one must publish - what used to make a
difference is whether or not there was a copyright notice - nowadays,
material is copyright by default, although the protection for
unpublished work may be limited.

(In some countries, not distributing, or giving very limited
distribution may leave you with no copyright protection.  I have a
feeling the USA may be one where protection on unpublished works is very
limited.)

> copies of his poetry to public on a street corner. He loses his
> copyright then and there. I think the same applies to open sites
> where all the material is offered "free" to the public... that is, no

The same is true of the internet.  Putting on the internet is
publication.  It is copyright by default until 70 years after the death
of author, and many countries will not allow that copyright to be abandoned.

The main problem area on the web is deep linking, particularly of
images.  The original web concept only really works with deep linking,
and didn't see web documents as compound objects with links to images
that were rendered in the page, but text documents, on the web can
identify their author and benefit that author, even when deep linked
from elsewhere.  Most commercial site operators would object to deep
linking images, and many object to deep linking text, but I don't know
if they have any legal rights to stop this.

Premature publication can prevent your getting a patent, but that is a
rather different sort of intellectual property.

> payment back to the originator. The attachment of the C in a circle
> and the correct words of Copyright, name, and date, may provide some

A requirement obsoleted by the Berne convention.

> protection, but even then the excerpt taken must be substantial and
> not trivial (usually determined by shortness or length of excerpt).
> Citation of the original in short bits of the original likely also
> cover the possibly offending user. Basically, anything on the Web in

Fair use rules vary from country to country, but usually give less
rights that most people assume.  Generally, fair usage applies where
there is a public benefit (reporting news, criticism, etc.), not as a
general licence to reproduce small amounts.  Quantity limits are there
to prevent abusive use of fair usage rights.

> open public sites can be used with very small danger of legal action
> against the copier-person. Further, the original owner must often
> prove MEASURABLE damages from the copying.... not easy in many cases.

I believe any US hosted web site must take down infringing material at
the request of the copyright owner.  I have heard that taking copyright
to court in the USA may need you to register the copyright, and getting
damages would require demonstration of a real cost to you, but I'm
fairly sure that you can get an injunction even when there is no cost to
you and that the DMCA take down procedure just requires that you own the
copyright and that fair usage exemptions don't apply.

The YouTube DMCA takedown procedure is documented at
<http://www.google.com/support/youtube/bin/answer.py?answer=58127&topic=10553&hl=en_US>.

> Consult your lawyer. 73 Charles Harpole [hidden email] Charles
> [hidden email] > Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 18:05:44 -0400>
> From: [hidden email]> To: [hidden email]> Subject: Re:

With all the newlines before the >s missing, this is very difficult to read.

In this case, I would suggest that the person whose copyright has been
infringed, either volunteer an explicit licence, or request the offender
to cease and desist.  If that fails, they should invoke YouTube's
copyright violation procedure.  Failing to challenge is probably the
worst thing to do.

I'm not a lawyer, but I don't really see any costs in doing this.  If
the YouTube refuse to remove the material, you would then need to
consult a lawyer.  The only issue that a lawyer might need to decide
before that is whether fair usage exemptions apply.

> [Elecraft] Copyright images used on YouTube "The Elecraft Band"
> without permission> CC: [hidden email]> > Shame!> > And he

--
David Woolley
"The Elecraft list is a forum for the discussion of topics related to
Elecraft products and more general topics related ham radio"
List Guidelines <http://www.elecraft.com/elecraft_list_guidelines.htm>
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com