Copyright Infringement, You might want to Check your Terms of Service... Options

[EriaNight]

Alright it is pretty obvious to me and to most of the world that the content (graphics, blogs, about 75% of everything CB has uses stock photos of actors/actresses/singers/people/etc that the artists didn't take).

This would be all find and dandy and no one would care If a few of us (not mentioning names so people won't get pissed at us) hadn't realized a Few things in the CB submission process.

You guys promote artist right?
And art?

Here is a nice definition of what Copyright Infringment is from Wikipedia

Copyright infringement is the unauthorized use of copyrighted material in a manner that violates one of the copyright owner's exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduce or perform the copyrighted work, or to make derivative works that build upon it....In many jurisdictions, such as the United States, copyright infringement is a strict liability tort or crime.

I Know what CB says about it. For those who do NOT know what CB says about Copyright Infridgement....here it is

CreateBlog respects the intellectual property of others, and we ask our users to do the same. CreateBlog may, in appropriate circumstances and at its discretion, disable and/or terminate the accounts of users who may be repeat infringers. If you believe that your work has been copied in a way that constitutes copyright infringement, or your intellectual property rights have been otherwise violated, please provide CreateBlog's Copyright Agent the following information:

* an electronic or physical signature of the person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the copyright or other intellectual property interest;
* a description of the copyrighted work or other intellectual property that you claim has been infringed;
* a description of where the material that you claim is infringing is located on the site;
* your address, telephone number, and email address;
* a statement by you that you have a good faith belief that the disputed use is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law;
* a statement by you, made under penalty of perjury, that the above information in your Notice is accurate and that you are the copyright or intellectual property owner or authorized to act on the copyright or intellectual property owner's behalf.

Please email claims of copyright or other intellectual property infringement to copyright at createblog dot com.

Now why am I mad? No one really cares if you aren't making money on any of the submissions. I wouldn't either. And you probably aren't. Only differences in the submission TERMSthere is are a few lines that strictly you just can't legally say.

For example...

By posting or submitting content to CreateBlog, you grant CreateBlog the right to use, reproduce, display, perform, adapt, modify, distribute, have distributed, and promote the content in any form, anywhere and for any purpose; and warrant and represent that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the content and that public posting and use of your content by CreateBlog will not infringe or violate the rights of any third party.

If you contribute layouts, scripts, graphics, tutorials, creative suggestions, ideas, notes, drawings, or other information (collectively, the "Submissions"), the Submissions shall be deemed, and shall remain, the property of CreateBlog. None of the Submissions shall be subject to any obligation of confidence on the part of CreateBlog, and CreateBlog shall not be liable for any use or disclosure of any Submissions. Without limitation of the foregoing, CreateBlog shall exclusively own all now known or hereafter existing rights to the Submissions of every kind and nature throughout the universe and shall be entitled to unrestricted use of the Submissions for any purpose whatsoever, commercial or otherwise, without compensation to the provider of the Submissions.

Everything in Red you cannot claim without legally breaking the law. No Person who took the photographs of Rachel Bilson, Kiera Knightley, etc used in about half the layouts ever agreed to these terms! All the layouts with pictures of actors/actresses/etc taken by other people....CANNOT be used commercially no matter what you say! If you want to use the commercially, even if you ask the creator of the layout, that person cannot give you the permission.

I'm not trying to be picky or mean. And most of you will probably shout me down. But CB, you cannot do that. If you support a community of artists, then support the people who actually HAVE it as a JOB and don't say you have commerial rights that you definitely do not have. Sure the "creators of the layout" agreed to this, but you KNOW they probably couldn't really and legally agree to it. I know you don't want to be sued and i definitely couldn't sue you and wouldn't because i don't have the time nor really care, but It's wrong to claim that you have commerical rights over something you don't. I bet the reason the layouts aren't even used as "promotional" material is because you know you could get sued.

I'm not trying to be mean. In fact, I'd rather not be. And I understand as an admin on another forum and runner of a graphics site with 2 other CB members that it takes work and time. I just think you should change your terms a little so that your MEMBERS don't get in TROUBLE with the law??

[add1cted2f1re]

arguing wont get anywhere. we all know WHAT the law SAYS. we all read it up there... but the more you argue, the more frustrated you all will get. you ALL raised VERY valid point. but i would have to disagree that the artists do not care. most of them go to great lengths to prevent people from taking their stuff.

however, a lot of the laws, such as the ones molly (erianight) has brought up can be INTERPRETED in MANY differnt ways.

-carrie is right
-molly is right
-i am right

etc

WHY!? b/c we all INTERPRET things different.

i can see how scanning a magazine and showing people can be considered "illegal" but then again i can see how it does no harm and could be brushed off as "okay"

[Gigi]

WHY!? b/c we all INTERPRET things different.

NO, really?

*rolls eyes*

createBlog is not a commercial site. It's community driven, it's non-profit. Oh, so you see the Google-bot, and the ads around here? It costs Jusun money to run these forums. The advertising only pays for that. There is no profit involved.

By artistically creating something new out of copyrighted images, YOU ARE CREATING SOMETHING NEW. Let's get something straight here. WE ARE NOT A STOCK PHOTOS SITE, OR A SCANS SITE. WE ARE A BLOGGING COMMUNITY SITE. Meaning, unless we post graphics, layouts, or anything BLOGGING-RELATED without permission from the creator, it's nothing to make a big deal about. We're not trying to pass off Mario Testino's new editorial in Vogue as photographed by say, me. Or Patrick Demarchelier's advertisements as our own. Because they're not. We're taking these photos, making something (I stress) NEW out of them, and therefore we have the right to make a commercial claim with these NEW layouts and graphics.

http://www.hitherston.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=97
^ "Yup, that's right. I know Emma Watson personally and I personally took that photo of her so using those pictures in a blend IS PERFECTLY FINE."

It doesn't matter if you're not a goddamned commercial site. If I use your definition, you're still trying to pass off something as your own.

[EriaNight]

http://www.hitherston.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=97
^ "Yup, that's right. I know Emma Watson personally and I personally took that photo of her so using those pictures in a blend IS PERFECTLY FINE."

It doesn't matter if you're not a goddamned commercial site. If I use your definition, you're still trying to pass off something as your own.

Good thing We accepted it already.........*raised eyebrow* You should read OUR TERMS first. and it DOES matter if you are a commercial site. and by the way everything paid for where hitherston is concerned comes out of my brothers OWN POCKET not a GOOGLE advertisement. Learn to work for a living.

BrownSugar--you think i wasted my time? I didn't read the thread all day. It doesn't take me that long to read a thread.

and gigi go WAY WAY BACK TO the first page where Retrogressive's post is, please and re-read it and re-read it.....It will tell you why making something "new" out of something "old" that still looks distinctly similar is still breaking the law.

and Brown Sugar again.

It seems like you have wasted your time trying to find every little thing wrong with cB.

Have I found everything wrong? My forum and Hitherston doesn't need a by laws section to govern itself.

[*Libertie*]

Good thing We accepted it already.........*raised eyebrow* You should read OUR TERMS first. and it DOES matter if you are a commercial site. and by the way everything paid for where hitherston is concerned comes out of my brothers OWN POCKET not a GOOGLE advertisement. Learn to work for a living.

My forum and Hitherston doesn't need a by laws section to govern itself.

That's a low blow and it was completely unnecessary. I think it'd be easier for you to get your point across if you weren't taking cheap shots and getting upset.

I'm not arguing with you at all, perhaps you bring up some points that should be considered, but it's all in the way you present those points. You see? Getting mad only makes people mad in return.