Category: Articles

Posted on

Thinking Long

It’s been a couple of weeks since I’ve posted, mostly because my personal life has recently taken a large chunk of my time. I have an elderly parent who is dealing with some significant medical issues plus I had to say goodbye to my longtime furball companion (and imaginary law partner) Benito T. Katz-Burns.

I bring up these personal things because they’ve made me think about impermanence, my practice, and serving my clients. Basically, it all made me think that the best thing I can do for my clients it to encourage them to think long.

Thinking long means looking long term and taking small steps that can have a big outcome. For example, compound interest is a cornerstone of thinking long: a little put away early in life can be a lot later.

As the saying goes, none of us gets out alive. What you do as a creative professional, however, will live beyond you. The assets you create, the copyrights, will pass on to your heirs after your demise and they may be much more valuable than you think. Thinking long means planing for them.

Actually, those assets may be much more valuable than you think now, too. Let me give an example…
Imagine a photographer who has a ton of copyrights, because this photographer has created a ton of photos[1]. One of these photos is being infringed often; by often, let’s say at least 100 times (so far). This photo isn’t the photographer’s best work (it’s a fine photo, but the photographer has much better ones); if you had to pick out from a pile of 1000 of this person’s photos which one would be the oft-infringed one, you’d probably guess wrong, like, 990+ times. Nonetheless, this one photo gets ripped off more often than bikini wax in Hollywood.

The photographer has registered the copyright to this photograph, so that means the minimum award for an infringement (assuming the defendant cannot prove innocent infringement, which is very hard to prove)[2] would be $750. This photographer has a history of licensing and can prove up damages of more than that, but for the sake of space and time, lets just assume that the photographer settles, over some time, 100 infringements for an average, each, after legal fees, of $1000.[3]

For those of you playing along at home, thats $100,000.
Not small beans!

Now, if this photographer suddenly died (heaven forbid!) before settling those cases, the photographer’s heir(s) would get ownership of that copyright and, assuming they pursued the infringements, get the money. And that’s just the cases that exist now–that photo will likely continued to be infringed.

In other words, you could be sitting on at least one good-but-not-great creative work that, in the long run, could pay for your kids college (or a big chunk of that); or help pay off your mortgage; or provide for your loved ones after you’re gone. And don’t forget,that math is for just that one photo (and its copyright)–any creative pro has easily thousands.

This is the time for thinking long. Do the small things now that will enable you to reap rewards, long into the future.

Thinking long is why I nag at you to register your copyrights–so that you have the right to statutory damages of no less than $750. Little numbers add up over time. It’s also why I keep bringing up having an estate plan. Your work is worth more than you might think and you don’t want that going to your fundy brother instead of your beloved non-spouse.

Thinking long is also a big part ofwhat I do and the way that I do it–so that creative professionals (you) can have legal representation in a cost-effective way.

Thinking long can makea big difference in your business and your life (and your loved ones’); give it some thought.

__________

[1] While this hypothetical is based on a real client and photo, please remember that it is a hypothetical and that you should never rely on a hypothetical or any previous results when it comes to your own case(s).

[2] See, e.g., National Football League v. PrimeTime 24 Joint Venture, 131 F. Supp. 2d 458, 476 (SDNY 2001) (noting that a defendants burden to prove innocent infringement is a heavy one).

[3] Yes, this is not scientific but rather a very rough estimate based on a bunch of facts I’m not going to go into here. Also, some matters never settle, some settle for more and others less; I’m doing some whopping generalizations to make a point. In other words, just go with it.

Posted on

How to Work With Your Lawyer: Trust

Creative professionals are usuallyvery smart people. Whether formally educated or not, your brains tend to fire pretty well (even if some people think they fire, um, differently). This is generally a good thing (especially the differently bit) and can definitely make for better art, no matter what your medium. The downside is that sometimes some of you think you know more than you really do*, especially abouta very technically precise field like the law. That attitude can bite you in the ass.

When I was in law school, I wrotea post on my Burns Auto Parts Super Premium Blog about how, before law school, I thought I knew copyright law pretty welland how wrong I was. See, I learned that while I knew more than the average person, what I knew was actually very, very little, especially compared to, say, a copyright lawyer. There is so much more to copyrightlaw (and law in general) than I ever could have imagined without having gone through all of law school. There is the interplay between the statutory scheme and constitutional issues, and how it works in day-to-day business, and how the courts interpret all of it, and more.Unless you immerse yourself for three years in intensive, undistractedstudy (hello,law school) and then get out there in the trenches, you just can’t know. I sure didn’t. Even after all that, you still have to do what I do: spend a ridiculous amount of time reading cases and highly technical academic articles to learn more, every day, just to keep up.

But I was one of you before law schoolone of those who even debated the woman who would become my mentor, Carolyn Wright, on legal questions that appeared in places like the old APA Forums. I look back on those debates with more than a little embarrassment. I thought I knew the law well enough to challenge her opinions when, really, I knew just enough to probably frustrate the hell out of her when she was trying to help by teaching the community the (actual) best practices (I will always appreciate her grace–not once did she later say “Do you remember…?”).

Now, after practicing for years, I know what itfeels like to be challenged by people who think they know more than they do. I have the headdesk-induced scars to prove it.

The most frustrating thing that happens in my practice isnt when the opposition pulls some chicanery or even when I get called names by defendants. Nope, the worst is when someone comes to me with a question which I answer based on my expertise (and often I do additional research to make sure my info on that particular issueis current), and then s/he doesnt like the answer, saying, Well, I feel that youre wrong.

First, you dontfeelthat Im wrong, youthinkI am (language matters!); and second, if you arent going to trust my opinion, then you shouldnt ask for it. Thats not me being petty, thats me knowing that I cant do the bestfor you unless you trust me when it comes to legal issues. My job is to fight for you and to have your back, but I cant do any of that if you dont trust that what I am telling you is the best, most accurate answer and advice based inthe law that I can give you. I’m not making stuff up or telling you what I think you want to hear–I’m being 100% straight with you. Im happy to talk to you and explain what I can, but in the end, you just have to trust me.

There are ethics rules that say we have to do what is best for you, sure, but I think most lawyers actively want to do what is best for our clients; that means telling you the truth, even the hard truth. None of us lawyers likes having to tell a (potential) client bad news. We know its unfair that a screwed-up copyright registration can scuttle an otherwise beautiful case and that the Copyright Office makes it damn easy to screw up (especially the published/unpublished thing). It sucksthat if we cant get you statutory damages (register, please) or documentthe value of yourlicenseis $10K we cant get $10K for you. It’s frustrating as hell that while any normal human can see your work has been knocked off, stylistically, proving its actually an infringement isn’t so clear and itwould cost gods own wallet to litigate and we could still lose, so we cant take the case on a contingency fee basis. And it’s not easy to tell you that you cant not do X now (without repercussions) because you agreed in your contract to do X.

Lawyerswant to be able to help people; thats why Ido what Ido (honestly, I think all good lawyers still hold that as their first principle). We look for ways to sayyesto whatever it is that you want, to enable you to achieve your goal, to fix the wrongs, promote the good, and to defend your rights, but sometimes we have to saynoornot like that you cantorwell, you can try it, but heres what youre risking, orit just isnt worth that much, or even,it sucks, but justwrite the check and move on. Your job, then, is to trust your lawyer; s/he is offering you the best advice possible.

I (and others) have describedlaw school like military bootcamp for the brain: a law student is stripped of her old way of thinking and taught a new way in her first year, then trained to use that new way to alevel of competence in the next two years. Then, we go out and apply it all in the real world, honing our knowledge and skills as we go. Maybe the Vulcan Science Academy is a better analogy, actually, because we learn toprocess a ton of data with dispassionate logic. But the best of us also reintroduce humanity to the practice and become weird hybrids of logic and compassion. That’s what I shoot for (and I know others that do the same).

The result of this training is that lawyers think strategically as well as tactically about each of your issues and formulate a plan to achieve yourobjectives, if at all possible; or to minimizethe bad stuff, if not. There is balance and judgment involved. Its tough work that requires more time and energy than you know. And that’s not me being egocentric–it’s just like howyour work is much more complicated and subtle than any outsider ever understands. Your work is pretty miraculous to me, even whenI don’t care for it aesthetically.

So, to have the best relationship with your lawyer, you dont have to like what you hear, but you do have to trust that it isseriously considered, bestadvice, with your best interests in first position.

Oh, and if you don’t think it really is, then don’t hesitate to get a second opinion from another lawyer.
But don’t be surprised ifthe answer is pretty much the same.

_______________

*This is true for all of us–we all have those areaswhere we think we know more than we really do.

Posted on

I Do. What Did I Do?!

Ah, love. I love love.
Marriage, however, well, let’s say I am not such a fan. The idea of getting married gives me Humback-whale-sized willies, just as a concept. But I’m odd in that–most people want to get married at some point, including creative pros.

Many traditional wedding vows point out that a marriage shouldnt be entered into lightly or unadvisedly. Good advice, but it’s given too late, while you’re standing there in front of friends and family, sealing the deal. For creative professionals, there is an extra wisdom to that advice that you need to think about long before saying,”I do.” If you are a creative professional, particularly a self-employed one, then marriage may affect you in ways you never dreamed.

As a creative pro, you create intellectual property: copyrights. When a creative work is made, fixed in a tangible (including digital) medium, the copyright automatically comes into being. I like to tell photographers that every time the shutter clicks, a copyright is created, but its the same for any creation; when I finish writing this post, its copyright will come into being.

The initial owner of the copyright is usually the author/artist who made the work. There are exceptions, like if you are an employee and make the work as a part of your job, or if you have signed a work-for-hire agreement before creating the work; but, for independent artists, the initial owner is usually the artist. That means, if you are a self-employed creative pro, you automatically own the copyright in each work you make. You make art; boom, you make its copyright.

Copyrights are assets. They are property (there is a reason copyright, trademarks, etc., are called intellectual property). They have value separate from the art-object itself. You can buy a painting, but that does not mean you own the painting’s copyright[1]. Copyrights can be bought and sold all on their own, separate from the art-object, too. The rights associated with copyright, like to reproduce a work, can be licensed to others. If you register your copyrights (and, please, register your copyrights), you get extra tools if they are infringed but, even without registration, copyrights are valuable assets, just like a car or a house.

Because copyrights are property and are like any property acquired during a marriage, if you divorce, they can become part of the calculations for spousal support, child support, or even be a part of the actual division of assets.

If you live in a community-property state, except for California (where copyrights still matter, but differently so, and well get back to that bear–pun intended–in a minute), the value of your copyrights has to be included in the division of property calculations. They also may affect spousal support and child support, but I’m not going into those support issues in this post (trust me, it’s a nightmare). In a community-property state, virtually all assets[2] acquired (or created) during a marriage must be split 50-50 at divorce. Very roughly speaking, this means adding up the value of all the assets in the marriage and dividing by 2.

As a massively simplified example: imagine you created only 2 copyrights during your marriage and they are valued at $5000 and $45,000; your soon-to-be ex gets half that total value, that is, $5K + $45K = $50k 2 = $25,000[3]. Get out your checkbook.

Now, think about how many copyrights you create in just a month or a year. Yup, we’re talking a ton of potential value. Just determining the value of the copyrights is going to be costly. You don’t get to say They’re worthless! Nope, you will need to hire experts and it is likely your ex will as well, adding to the costs and the legal fees as this is all hashed out.

Now, if that isn’t bad enough, even more concerning is that if you get revenue from the copyrights, your ex may also be entitled to a share of that revenue. This may betrue even for future revenue, after the divorce, as long as the copyrights were created during the marriage[4]!

Turning back to the California bear, things here are even more troubling for the creator-spouse. In my adopted state, not only does the non-creator-spouse (if you split) get the (ahem) gift bag described already, the state courts have decided that the non-creator spouse, at the moment of the copyright’s creation, automatically owns an undivided half of the actual copyright in any work created by the creator-spouse during the marriage[5]. You read that right–you create and your spouse magically becomes the joint owner of the copyright, right then.

Whats the big deal with that? Well, lots (including that I think that is contrary to federal law) but, practically speaking, it means that, even without divorce, the creator-spouse loses control over her/his work. I don’t care how much you love your partner, this can really suck. The non-creator spouse in California can sell or bequeath his/her half interest in the work to anyone, without the creator-spouses permission. S/he can also license the work to anyone (assuming that thelicense is otherwise legal), again, without the creator-spouses approval; the only requirement is that revenues must be (equally) shared.

The final California insult: at divorce, if you are the creator-spouse, you’re going to have to negotiate ownership with your soon-to-be ex, which will likely mean buying him/her out. Ouch. If not that, then agreeing to transfer halves to each other, meaning that you lose ownership of some of your own work. Ouch again.

Most states are not community-property states, luckily. However, even under their various laws, the value of your copyrights may significantly affect any financial settlements in your divorce.

You can avoid much of this by getting a prenuptial agreement that includes provisions to keep copyrights as separate property and describes how revenues related to them will be handled, in the event of a split. If you are already married, you can still have such an agreement drafted (a post-nup) and (hopefully) executed by you and your spouse. As in all things, consult with your own attorney before doing anything–preferably one who does primarily family law (so, um, not me) but who understands IP law or who can collaborate with someone who does (like me).

_______________

[1] Unless you bought that too, and that transfer has to be in a signed writing.

[2] There are some exceptions, depending on the state.

[3] See, e.g., Berry v. Berry, 277 P. 3d 968 (Hawaii 2012)

[4] See, e.g., Rodrigue v. Rodrigue, 218 F.3d 432, 443 (5th Cir. 2000)

[5] In re Marriage of Worth, 195Cal App. 3d 768, 241 Cal. Rptr. 135 (1987) is the controlling case in California.

 

Posted on

Pay Your People, NOW

If you are working in California and use crew (including models/cast) of any kind, you need to pay your crew before they leave on the last day of the project. UPDATE: As of September 5, 2019, you have up to the next REGULAR payday after the end of the project. Still, don’t screw it up. 

No, I am not kidding.

California’s labor laws are some of the most complex in the USA, but you probably already knew that. Maybe you’ve heard that some of those laws state that when you dismiss an employee, that employee must be paid in full on the day of the dismissal (that includes things like accrued vacation time, by the way). What you likely did not know is that when you hire a model or a stylist or an assistant (etc.) for a project, be that for 2 hours or 2 weeks, or 6 months, when that project ends, you are “dismissing” the person for the purposes of the applicable laws; that means that you must pay the person everything s/he is owed, on that very day. There is a minor exemption for motion pictures (it gives a little leeway) but, trust me, you don’t qualify for it.

I already know what you’re thinking: I’ll just have in my agreement with any crew that they will be paid within Xdays. Bzzz! No.Thank you for playing. The laws specifically prohibit contracting around this requirement.

This is a sneaky requirement and one that can cost you a pile of buckos (considerably more than the Benjis above), especially because there are often layers of players. For example, maybe you are contracted by an ad agency for an end client… you could end up holding the bag. The penalties are very steep–including having to pay the person’s wages for every day you haven’t paid, for up to 30 days, plus the employee can get attorneys’ fees. So, for example, you hire a stylist for $1500 a day, for a one-day shoot; then, you don’t cut the check for two weeks. You now could be on the hook for (on top of the original $1500 you’ve already paid) $1500 x 14 = $21,000, plus attorneys’ fees!

Apparently, models in particular are catching onto this and they are suing or threatening to sue photographers and their clients for these claims. To be clear, you are not out of the woods if you go through a modeling agency whichyou pay later, or a producer, or any agency. Also, trying to claim that someone is an independent contractor will also likely not save you–in California, you should assume that any individual working for you on a creative project under your direction is an employee under these laws (and others, like the workers comp laws).

Now, even if you aren’t in California, your state may have similar laws. It’s something you should definitely check on.

So, what can you do? Your best action is to pay your cast and crew on the final day of anyproject. If you are using an agency or a producer who will be paying others, still pay on the final day and have that person/entity indemnify you against any claims related to these laws (talk to your lawyer about this). Have your payroll company on notice that you need to pay on that day. Maybe arrange to pay electronically, on that final day.

In short, pay now,because you sure don’t want to have to pay later.Besides, it’s just good to pay your people immediately; stringing people on (even if you get strung by your client) is, in my opinion, a petty, nasty practice. Don’t do it. If you pay immediately, sure, you may be a bit cash-poor until you get paid but, in the end, you’re doing the right thing.

Posted on

Sit On Your Hands and Breathe

In some ways, law school is like learning to be Vulcan–you have to learn to think logically and keep your emotions out of it. It isn’t that we lawyers don’t feel (boy howdy, no!), but we have learned to be ledby logic rather than our emotions, at least when it comes to our cases. We learned to think rather than react. That difference can be rather crucial in legal matters.

My studies in Buddhism have helped me with this. I have learned to sit with thoughts and feelings, to observe them without judgement, and to make better choices from that. It takes a hell of a lot more to make me lose my temper than it used to. I still feel, and profoundly, but I can identify that as “feeling” and not let it interfere with my rational processing.

Creative clients are especially emotional sometimes. I think it is part of what makes you all artists–you make your livings by expressing emotions in some manner. For some of you, this can manifest as reacting before thinking. While that may be great for making your art, it can be very bad when faced with a legal issue.

Let’s take an infringement, for example. If you find your work being used without your permission, you’re going to be angry and hurt and you’re going to want to yell at someone, but that would be a poor choice. You could accidentally limit your recovery (or at least make it damn hard to negotiate a good settlement). You may throw a client under the bus because it accidentally shared your work (maybe if you knew that you’d forgive the client’s idiocy to keep that client). You might say something that isn’t true–my favorite is “The penalty for infringement is $150,000 per infringement!” (sigh…if only!). You may also be mistaken and the user does have a license you forgot about or it’s a legitimate fair use. If you go off half-cocked, you’re not going to catch any of that and, well, that would be bad.

So, when you find an infringement, here is what I think you should do:

  1. Immediately preserve evidence of the infringement (make screenshots, for example). Find every use you can and capture every URL, buy products that bear your work, take photos of your work being used, etc.
  2. Look up the company/person who controls the infringement, likethe website (try a Whois search, perhaps), or the manufacturer of the product. Save that info.
  3. After that, sit on your hands (i.e., do nothing) and breathe.

Do not call or email the infringer/bad actor. Do not call or email the entity you think may have “shared” your work. In fact, don’t even call or email yourattorney (yet). Nothing is going to get fixed immediately and no more harm is going to happen (in most cases)–you have time. You have three years to bring a suit for infringement in the US, so doing nothing for a couple of days after finding the infringement isn’t going to hurt your case. If your work isn’t registered and it is more than 3 months since you first published it, registering it now isn’t going to change anything for the better, even. So just sit and breathe.

After you have calmed down, maybe days later if you are really upset, look at the evidence you gathered. Search for any license you may have granted that might cover the use. Find your registration materials (assuming the work is registered). Basically, get everything together to make your case file. Then re-evaluate your case and set your goals to make you whole. Then you can plan on how to achieve thosegoals. And then you can begin to act.

This is true for many matters–that is, nothing bad is going to happen if you don’t act right that very second but you can do harm by reacting without thinking. Instead, record the evidence; sit on your hands and breathe; think/re-evaluate; set goals; act.

Now, “act” may very well be “call/email my attorney” but, by taking the time to let the emotions cool off, you haven’t hurt your case and you have thought about what really matters to you in it. The slap-in-the-face you felt will have calmed so that you can think more rationally about what you want. And you have all the materials together to help your attorney evaluate your case.

You don’t have to become Vulcan-like, but if yousave most ofyour emotions for your art, you’ll likely get better results in both your art and the law.

Posted on

Breach or Infringement?

I’ve heard that some photo organizations may be suggesting that the way to avoid the costs of litigating an infringement claim is to have a liquidated damages clause in your site’s terms of service (TOS), because then (they say) it’s a breach of contract rather than an infringement. For example, if you put something on your site’s TOS like “If you use any of the work from this site without a license, you agree to pay to PhotoBob three times his usual fees for the license” and someone uses your work, then you can bring a breach of contract case in small claims court and avoid the cost of litigating infringement in federal court.

I have to say, I think this is very bad advice. I hope that pro groups are not recommending it. Short answer? It probably won’t work and, even if it could, it’s not a good choice. Let me explain.

First, it is very possible that your TOS are not binding on your visitors. There is case law that says that in order for TOS to be binding, a user has to either click to agree to those terms (called a clickwrap agreement) or those terms have to be so obvious as to, essentially, be on each page of your site–just having a separate page with your TOS won’t cut it. (Lawyers reading this, yes, I’m generalizing from the cases–we need to know the nitty gritty but creatives really don’t.)

Second, even if you could make the TOS stick, you would be limited to winning no more than your 3X number, and you’d have to prove that you usually got $X as a license fee in the first place. 3X is likely not going to be much money. In fact, it’s going to have to be under like $5,000 if you want to stay in small claims, depending on what the small claims court rules are where you are–that is, there are limits on how big a case you can bring in small claims. Oh, and you probably can’t use a lawyer (many small claims courts bar representation) so you’re going to have to do it all yourself.

Oh, and let’s say you win a judgment in small claims and the defendant doesn’t pay. You can’t then go marching into federal court claiming that it’s now an infringement and demand a lot more money. Even if by some miracle you did pull that off, that is that the court didn’t dismiss the case immediately, the court would likely say your damages are limited to the judgment you got already or darn close to it.

Third, how are you going to prove that the infringer got the work from your website? Have you posted it anywhere else, like Instagram? Good luck enforcing your site’s TOS, then.

Fourth, and this is the big one (yes, I buried the lede): copyright pre-emption will likely make your breach claim a loser. See, copyright is exclusively federal law and can only be adjudicated in federal court; so, if you bring a claim that is really an infringement claim, a smart defendant is going to tell the small claims court “Hey, this is really infringement we’re talking about here so you have to dismiss this case because this court doesn’t have jurisdiction.” I think a defendant is going to win with that and, boom, you’ve just waisted all your time (and filing fees).

There is one possible exception to pre-emption here, but it’s a narrow window and one I don’t like anyway. That is, if you agreed to license the work to the defendant and it later failed to pay for the license, then courts have said that is a breach of contract rather than an infringement (unless the terms of the written license stated that the license was contingent upon full and timely payment). See Effects Assocs., Inc. v. Cohen, 908 F.2d 555, 559 N.7 (9th Cir. 1990). Now, I think you should have written licenses and those licenses should specifically state that no license is granted until full and timely payment is received; but, if you have that, then the courts say it is not a breach of contract and, so, there you go… pre-emption again.

Really, I think it’s cutting off your nose to spite your face to try and convert an infringement claim into a breach of contract one. I mean, if you register your work in a timely manner (before the infringement) then you have the right to elect statutory damages and you have a decent chance at being awarded your attorneys’ fees as well. That is very, very likely going to be a much larger number than what you’d ever get in small claims court. More importantly, if you want to avoid litigation (and I always say: you want to avoid litigation), you have a better chance at negotiating a better result if you have statutory damages and maybe attorneys’ feesto back up your claim. A breach of contract claim is almost always some kind of wonky and the damages are limited–why do that to yourself?

 

Posted on

Registration Nag: No. 5226

I know, you’re likely already sick of me nagging about registering your copyrights as early as possible, but until y’all stop sitting on your hands, I’m going to keep at it.Today’s juicy reason is that sometimes a new infringement isn’t new.

The Hollywood Reporter in this article talks about a recent ruling in a copyright case involvingan artist who created some famous tattoos. The artist who created art on LeBron James did not register the copyright when he created the works and when theywere infringed by a video game company (who has Mr. James in its game), twice, it was too late to get statutory damages. So the artist registered later and when the video game company released a new version of the game, the artist tried to say it was a new infringement so that he could get statutory damages and potentially attorneys’ fees. The court, however, said the new release was the same infringement as the old ones because the use was essentially identical. If aninfringement starts before registration, the bright-line rule is you can’t get statutory damages (or attorneys’ fees), so the artist can’t get statutory damages here.

In short, his $1.2million case is now likely worth, at best, a few thousand (and he’s going to have to prove up that value).

Ouch.

______

(note, the photo above is not of the tattoo in question; it isn’t even a real tattoo)

Posted on

Get it in Writing

This NYTimes articleabout the legal limbo of some Avedon prints just breaks my heart. Besides the obvious part about the amazing work done by all, including the printers, being stuck in boxes, mostly unseen, the stories about why there are issues now make my downright twitchy.

Artists of all kinds are notorious for being crap at paperwork and many so-called great artists often offer(ed)their favors like Raylan Givens asking “one more time” with a smile, while puttinghis hands on his hips,revealing his badge and sidearm. That combo of sloppy business practices or, worse, intimidation by the Artiste, and fear of the employee/contractor to ask for something more concrete or as filthy as actual paymentwill likelyleadto situations like those described in the article, long after the artist is dead and gone.

It even happens when both sides actually like and respect each other but just don’t bother to putsomethingin writing. The road to hell, and all that.

Don’t let this happen to you and, almost more importantly, don’t put your minions in impossible situations.This means having open communication with the people you work with–interns, employees, vendors, whomever–so that you each can offer solutions about how to make something happen, without any one feeling taken advantage of or stuck in ambiguity about what s/he gets for her/his efforts. Intimidation is not becoming to anyone, even an artist. Having your minions fear you only makes you an ass (and generally makes them poor workers).

When you hire employees or independent contractors, pay them actual money whenever possible. Also, have signed agreements describing the relationship, the duties of each party, and anything else that comes up like “InternBetty gets to keep one set of the prints she makes for PhotoBob as a part of her compensation.” Veryimportantly, those agreements should describe what happens when and if the relationship turns bad and someone wants out.For individual projects with special circumstances, take the time to lay out the relationships involved so that everyone is, quite literally, on the same page.

And, whatever you do, put it in writing. A formal contract is best, but anything that lays out the understanding of the people involved and is signed (and preferably dated) by everyone is better than nothing.

Sure, you (like Avedon) won’t have to deal with whatever happens after you die, but I suspect you don’t want to leave your loved ones with big legal expenses to sort out your messes, either. Besides, it’s better business to treat everyone with respect. An agreement is the documentation of that mutual respect.

Posted on

Excited and humbled

Today is the first day of this new practice. My new practice. It is the culmination of a lot of dreaming and a lot of work and many years of patience.

I wanted to go to law school for a very long time. In fact, I took the LSATs 3 times, not because I did poorly (the opposite, actually) but because my scores expired before I could get all the pieces to work so that I could attend. Scores last for 5 years so you can do the math there. Finally, everything came together and I happily did the work of being a full scholarship law student. I graduated a trimester early and passed the notoriously difficult California Bar on my first try. Then Istarted lawyeringwith Carolyn Wright (photoattorney.com) which was outstanding training in exactly the work I wanted to do (she is a great mentor to whom I owe so much).

And now, today, I get to hangmy (virtual)shingle. Burns the Attorney. Wow. It’s very exciting for me.Thank you to everyone who made this possible. I’m humbled to get to do this.

Thank you also to the clients who have already contacted me for new representation (and it’s not even 9am here as I type this!). It is my intentionto serve you all well, honorably, and as much like a decent human as any lawyer can be.

Let’s do this.

Posted on

CMI and the DMCA

As a creative professional, you have a gazillion acronyms and abbreviations in your vocabulary. Here’s another one you should know: CMI.

CMI stands for Copyright Management Information and, generally speaking, it is data that identifies the copyright owner of a work. For example, on the photo above you’ll see my watermark in the form of a copyright notice in the lower right. That watermark is CMI.

In my opinion, you should always have visible CMI on any visual art (or, frankly, any creative work) you put out into the world. Why? Easy, under the DMCA (the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, another acronym for your vocab), CMI is protected. CMI functions as identification that the work is yours and, if your work is infringed and the CMI is removed or altered without your authority, you have extra tools to wield.

Specifically, if your work is infringed and the CMI is removed or altered, the infringer has committed at least one (and possibly two) violations of Section 1202 of the DMCA. Each violation carries statutory damages of not less than $2,500 and not more than $25,000, and the prevailing party may get its attorney’s fees and costs too. Oh, and the work doesn’t have to be registered for you to be eligible for those damages (but register your work, m’kay)!

Also, removal of visible CMI is strong evidence that an infringement is willful. If your work is timely registered (and, please, register all your work), willfulness increases the maximum statutory damages from $30,000 to $150,000. Even if you are unlikely to get the maximum (and, here on planet reality, you are unlikely to get the maximum in most cases), willfulness will be a factor in setting the statutory damages higher overall. So you really should have visible CMI on your work.

Best practice is to use a proper copyright notice like mine (although it doesn’t have to be that size–just visible and readable). A proper notice is the © (or the word “copyright”) and the year of first publication of the work (note that is not the year of creation, unless they are the same of course) and the copyright owner’s name (not your url, not your biz name unless your biz owns the work as opposed to you, personally). Note that you don’t have to have registered your work to use the symbol (unlike for trademarks where you can only use ® for registered trademarks).

Using a proper copyright notice kind of kills two birds with one stone (a post for a different day) so I encourage doing that. Still, any visible watermark that identifies the owner of the work will very likely count as CMI, so you can use something other than the notice, if you insist (but I will give you the squinky eye for that).

What is important is that the watermark must identify the owner for it to count as CMI. You can’t just put anything on there and have it count. Today, I saw a tweet by Image Rights that suggested putting its”protected by Image Rights” watermark on works to “help protect” the work. While maybe using that might discourage someone from using the work, that watermark will not count as CMI, so I don’t think it’s a good idea to use it. I mean, you could, but then you’d also have your own CMI watermark on the work as well. With all that on a work, it’s going to get pretty crowded and likely lose whatever marketing value displaying the work may generate.

For what it’s worth, your own watermark also functions for marketing purposes. Credit lines (while also CMI if posted adjacent to the work, and so its removal is a violation) don’t usually travel with a work when it gets ripped off or legitimately shared on sites like Facebook.

Finally, when you discover an infringement and realize that you haven’t properly, timely registered the work, the DMCA violation(s) may make the case something that an attorney would be willing to take on a contingency fee basis, since the potential recovery is more than just actual damages. If for no other reason than that, I suggest artists should make sure to use CMI-proper watermarks!

Terms of Service Proudly powered by WordPress