From: "William Robb" > ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Sessoms" > Subject: Re: DMCA Takedown (was Stolen Photos) >> >> Unless I have the copyright holders expressed permission; a written >> release; under the DMCA, I must not allow copyrighted material to be >> reproduced on my equipment. > Is the copyright owner under any onus to mark copywritten material as > such under the DMCA? > Also, what countries other that the USA are signatory to it? That I don't know.
What I do know is the guidance from my corporate masters says if it's marked with copyright notice; has a studio/photographers name stamped on it; or "looks like it was taken by a professional photographer", we're required to inform the customer of the copyright restrictions and not let them print the photos. Unless they have a signed release. I'm in the USA, and the DMCA - and the corporate lawyer's interpretation of it - restrict what I can do with the mini-lab. What anyone else is allowed to do in any other country doesn't matter. I've got several photographers using the lab who copyright their own photos. It's not a problem since I am able to reasonably verify they are the copyright holder. A driver's license and a business card are generally all it takes ... and the business card ain't 100% required. The problem comes when a customer comes in with a wedding album & every one of the photos in it have "(c) some date - some photographer/studio". If they don't have the signed release, they're out of luck using the machines I'm responsible for. At this point, at least here in the USA, I think the onus on the photographer is to provide his/her customer with the appropriate release if he/she is expecting the customer to do their own printing. Otherwise, the customer's going to have problems, and they're likely to come back complaining to the photographer. And that seems to me to be a preventable problem. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
