Forum Moderators: not2easy
I am based in the UK and found someone in the US with the exact match for an article I posted on my site in Sept 2004.
I have contacted the owner and he has told me that I am the one with the copied content and i should remove 'his' content.
My question is this, how do I prove to the host company that I have posted this article first? It does not show up on the way back yet and I am lost for any other ideas.
Thank you in advance for any replies.
Someone else has written the article for me. They have written a few articles for me (around 10) and this particular article seems to be the only one that has another copy online.
The writer that I use only writes articles for me so I can't really see there being a problem with the writer submitting the article several times. The only problem that I can forsee is that the writer has copied this article and sold it to me.
I want to make certain that this article was on my site BEFORE his site.
I. Mailing Copies
Print out a copy of the article and put it in an envelope. Go down to the post office and have them put the postmark on the envelope over the seal a couple times then mail it to yourself. Mail a couple copies since it is cheap. Do not open them.
Should you find yourself in court, you have proof of the article's ownership along with the date which is an official postmark.
For extra measure, mail a copy to a friend/relative.
II. Notary
Print out a copy of the article and have each page notarized with your signature/date. The cost can be from $2-$7 per page.
Bottom Line:
You find yourself in court against the thief. The judge hears both sides of the story.
Him: Your honor, this is mine and he stole it. Here is a generic print out of the story from my home computer.
You: Your honor, this is my original work. Here is a copy of said article which was certified on this date as proved by the (notary or postmark on unopened envelope).
Just my thoughts. Would love to hear more ideas. If the item was done for you by another party, you should have a signed dated contract (preferable notarized) stating so.
Additionally, you should always have in your contracts a portion where the third party guarantees it is an original work. Being this is a third party case, you may have been duped and without a solid contract--you have nothing to stand on but a lesson learned.
Following that logic, I can copy your stuff, print it out as my own, notarize it and then sue you in hopes that you yourself haven't had your content notarized at an earlier date?
That would certainly suck.
Case and point: I can mail an empty, unsealed envelope to myself at any time. Once it has the postmark on it, I can keep it until I want to "copyright" something - even years later. Then I just print out a copy, put it in the envelope and seal it.
Notarizing it may be better, but if you're going to all that trouble just get real registered copyright on the work - it only costs $30 [copyright.gov].
and in reality offers no real protection at all in court
Not correct. While there are better ways to go, it offers up better evidence to the Judge than simply saying it is mine mine mine and believe me.
I am speaking of US court only as I know nothing about international court.
Copyright is automatically generated on creation and if it is important, go the whole way. For an article, the poor mans way is best.
The practice of sending a copy of your own work to yourself is sometimes called a “poor man’s copyright.” There is no provision in the copyright law regarding any such type of protection, and it is not a substitute for registration.
- emphasis added
Draw your own conclusions.
I now return this thread to the original topic …
That is, afterall, the goal unless some sissy wants to try and sue for lost income (which he has to prove) and "emotional damages."
:-)
Hmm... so I guess only "sissy" people care about protecting their copyright - who knew.
:-)
Just take my comment there with a grain of salt. It was a subtle jab at ridiculous US court cases you hear about.
If the Wayback Machine shows the article on that site before the file date for the article sent to you, then he plagiarized it from that site.
And maybe in your discussions with the other web site owner you could find out when he claims he posted HIS version.
Without documentation of some kind, you have a problem.
DaveN
From the US Copyright Office website FAQ (http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html)The practice of sending a copy of your own work to yourself is sometimes called a “poor man’s copyright.” There is no provision in the copyright law regarding any such type of protection, and it is not a substitute for registration.
- emphasis addedDraw your own conclusions.
I now return this thread to the original topic …
One needs to look into how court proceedings work, what "evidence" is and how a judge uses it in deciding a case.
A case is decided by a disinterested party (the judge) based on the evidence presented. While not the best evidence, presenting a PMC in court is much stronger than simply offering up "it's mine" as your defense.
While there is no provision in the copyright law for such an item, it is still legal evidence to be offered in a court of law.
HAVING SAID THAT....
It is possible that a judge may not view the PMC as valid. Every judge is different. I am certainly not recommending you use a PMC for anything valuable. Rather, use it for small items not worth the money such as a simple article because it is better than nothing. In small claims court (if that is where the case is heard), you represent yourself--no lawyers. In higher courts, lawyers take over and a good lawyer can work to punch holes in the PMC evidence.
Additionally, I do not want to give the impression that articles are not worth the money because they can be. If you have written a solid article which may gain national recognition--I certainly would spend the money. However, for basic small articles that will most likely on see the light of day on your website--probably worth only a PMC.
You should always go with an official copyright registration when possible.
The crux of the matter: TigerSBT used a 3rd party to write the article and is not sure of its originality.
TigerSBT is now setup to be sued by the other party if the item was indeed copied by this 3rd party author.
Unfortunately, the best plan here is to stop using the article unless you can prove it is an original work from the 3rd party author.
BTW, if your do not have a written contract for this item--you do not own the copyright to it.
This would be a good lesson for all those here who hire 3rd parties to create for them.
Under the copyright law, an independent contractor (which is anyone not an employee) owns the copyright UNLESS there is a written contract between the two parties stating otherwise (specifically).
So the final point being this:
TigerSBT, if you do not have a contract between you and this writer which states he or she is doing this item as a work for hire--you have no ownership and thus, have no legal leg to stand on.
One needs to look into how court proceedings work, what "evidence" is and how a judge uses it in deciding a case.A case is decided by a disinterested party (the judge) based on the evidence presented. While not the best evidence, presenting a PMC in court is much stronger than simply offering up "it's mine" as your defense.
While there is no provision in the copyright law for such an item, it is still legal evidence to be offered in a court of law.
The problem with poor man's copyright is that you cannot base a case on it. To file an infringement lawsuit you must first have filed for a registered copyright with the US Copyright Office for the work in question. With no application to the US Copyright Office you cannot even bring the case to trial.
In addition, a registered copyright filed within 5 years of the publication date of the material is considered prima facie evidence. Which essentially means the registered copyright trumps the PMC no matter when it was mailed.
With no application to the US Copyright Office you cannot even bring the case to trial.
That is not correct. You can take them to small claims court by filling out the proper paperwork and filing it.
Let's not forget that, depending on the situation, you can sue for plagiarism.
I've cited my source (www.copyright.gov) would you mind citing yours?
Particularly one that says you can sue someone in small claims court for copyright infringement.
Enlighten me.
Agree...
You can't sue someone in small claims court for copyright-anything ... it's a federal court matter only (US). The only way you may be able to get around this would be to 'bill' the person/company for use (assuming you have the disclaimer and amount stated in your terms)... if they don't pay - file a warrant in debt (breach of contract). This can be done in either small claims, or civil - depending upon the amount.
Note: I am not a lawyer, and urge that anyone with questions of copyright seek actual legal counsel for the 'official' answers.
No... I simply file a DMCA - and then request financial damages. ( all of my web sites & images are registered copyrights - with some trademarks thrown in )
The only one that would probably "cry and get so depressed" would be the offender :)
However, in keeping with the OT here, the original poster might not even own the copyright to begin with which makes this all moot.
As bobothecat pointed out: I too am no lawyer. I look forward to that day though. :D
Seek advice from a practicing professional always.
However, these posts do provide some interesting conversation, learning, and research assistance.
But I can't really chat right now because I am too depressed to even get out of bed.
;-)
WARNING: I am just your average white suburbanite slob!
:D
As to small claims court, I was speaking on plagiarism and should have stated that better.
From dictionary.law.com [dictionary.law.com]:
plagiarism
n. taking the writings or literary concepts (a plot, characters, words) of another and selling and/or publishing them as one's own product. Quotes which are brief or are acknowledged as quotes do not constitute plagiarism. The actual author can bring a lawsuit for appropriation of his/her work against the plagiarist and recover the profits. Normally plagiarism is not a crime, but it can be used as the basis of a fraud charge or copyright infringement if prior creation can be proved.
The way I read it, that's still a copyright infringement suit, and thus is still a federal court matter.
I'm not a lawyer either.
But I think we can agree that the only way to truly protect any of your work is to officially register the copyright. I maintain that the success of the Poor Man's Copyright as the solitary means of proof of ownership is a myth.
Copyright Infringement solely means that they infringed on your registered copyright.
As to protection, I simply said a PMC is better than nothing and in small claims court could very well be entertained.
Any good piece you do should have the official paperwork completed on it though.
Also, without the copyright (official), it would be pointless to bother with any small claims action unless the article was copied in its entirety--IMHO.
In the end, if your work is not worth $30--it is probably not worth going to court for anyway.
Disclaimer: I am not an attorney, but have gone to court and successfully won several website copyright/trademark violations.
If you file a DMCA complaint, it is an affidavit that the intellectual content is yours. You do not need to prove it - this is a statement under oath.
Furthermore, it sounds as if your work is protected by the Berne Convention to which the US is a signatory. Being based in the UK you do *not* have to take any special measures to copyright a work, and that work is still covered under US law.
However, if the work has been written for you by another party you need to be 100% sure that you control the copyright before acting.
In the majority of cases an assertion to the web site owner that the IP is yours and is legally protected is sufficient, failing that a DMCA complaint to the host will typically work.
