Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="crycocyon" data-source="post: 296105" data-attributes="member: 13076">Firstly I never said that was a legal procedure, I stated it as a simple means of deterrence. Secondly, they won't know if you registered it or not, and it is not incumbent upon you to tell them. It is enough to tell them that it is your image and then they can decide whether they will take the risk of being sued. Thirdly, if there is copyright on it, then if they infringe, and the mark is there, it is willful, meaning $150k instead of $200 in damages if it was not willful (of course assuming it was registered). Thirdly, if you have CMI on the image, then you can still recover damages without registering the work. It is illegal to remove CMI from an image. Check section 1202 of the US Copyright Act. You make it sound like copyright has no teeth if you don't register. If that was the case then what is the point of even putting copyright notice on a work? There is inherent protection there already from the moment of creation. Yes, registering does as you say make it possible to identify the work and recover damages, but there are ways of proving the image is yours apart from that, like CMI. You can send a DCMA, or a simple cease and desist. Those complaints are made in good faith under penalty of perjury. But honestly, who would be willing to fight that and risk paying damages/legal fees when they know themselves they are not the rightful owners of the copyright? Most of the time it will be settled by a simple C&D. By the way, Leonard won without registering:<a href="http://www.photoattorney.com/photographer-awarded-16-million-dollars-copyright-infringement-action/" target="_blank">Photographer Awarded $1.6 Million Dollars in Copyright Infringement Lawsuit | Photo Attorney</a>So it's possible. But yes, registering would be the best protection if you intend to sue someone for infringement.</blockquote>

Verification