According to The Hollywood Reporter, Fox News has confidentially settled its 9/11 photo social media lawsuit. The case commenced soon after September 11, 2013 because Fox News' "Justice with Judge Jeanine" posted on Facebook the iconic photo of three firefighters raising the American flag at the ruins of the World Trade Center without obtaining permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright issues are becoming more challenging in the Social Media Age. However, its important to read and understand the terms of service and privacy policy of each platform. For example, when utilizing Facebook, "you grant us [Facebook] a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable,
royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on
or in connection with Facebook (IP License). Since I don't like these terms I don't post personal photos to my Facebook account.
News organizations must be very careful about monetizing the photographs they see online without obtaining a proper license. For example, in 2013 a jury awarded a photojournalist $1.2 million dollars after Agence France-Presse and Getty Images (and others) utilized photos he posted on Twitter regarding the 2010 Haiti earthquake without obtaining the proper licenses from him.
The bottom line is that when posting and re-posting content online it is important to understand copyright law issues.
Copyright 2015 by The Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC All rights reserved.
Showing posts with label Social Media Copyright. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Media Copyright. Show all posts
Thursday, April 16, 2015
Friday, December 28, 2012
Instagram, Facebook, and Social Media Terms and Conditions
Instagram was sold to Facebook earlier this year for $1 billion dollars. Facebook didn't buy Instagram to make its founders wealthy, it bought Instagram to monetize its users' content. Facebook expects to monetize Instagram in the same manner it is making money off of its users' content. This is why Facebook changed Instagram's terms and conditions last week.
Immediately after Instagram updated it terms and conditions, its users became very angry. Despite, Instagram's claim otherwise, its new terms of service greatly expanded its rights to utilize its users' content and unlike Facebook's terms and conditions, Instagram appeared to provide itself in perpetuity the right to monetize its users' content even after a user deleted his account.
Facebook and Instagram provide services that enable people and brands to interact with each other. In return for using their platforms, Facebook and Instagram have a right to utilize the information uploaded to make money off of the intellectual property contained on their websites. To better understand this one should review Facebook's terms and conditions that states, "you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook."
However, Facebook clearly states, "This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it. Interestingly, it did not appear that Instagram included this sentence in their proposed updated terms and conditions.
Should Instagram's users be surprised at its decision to push the envelope on monetizing its users' content? Since Facebook owns Instagram, is Facebook using Instagram as a testing ground to determine how far they can go with monetizing their users' content before their users revolt? I discussed these issues with Bloomberg Television at the height of this news cycle: The complete fallout from this matter is still yet to be determined. Even though there is a new report that states that Instagram has lost approximately 25% of its daily active users since its announcement that it would change its terms and conditions, it is too soon to speculate if the updated terms and conditions is the main factor. It may be advisable to read the terms and conditions of every digital platform utilized so you don't become a Human Centipad.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2012 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Immediately after Instagram updated it terms and conditions, its users became very angry. Despite, Instagram's claim otherwise, its new terms of service greatly expanded its rights to utilize its users' content and unlike Facebook's terms and conditions, Instagram appeared to provide itself in perpetuity the right to monetize its users' content even after a user deleted his account.
Facebook and Instagram provide services that enable people and brands to interact with each other. In return for using their platforms, Facebook and Instagram have a right to utilize the information uploaded to make money off of the intellectual property contained on their websites. To better understand this one should review Facebook's terms and conditions that states, "you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook."
However, Facebook clearly states, "This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it. Interestingly, it did not appear that Instagram included this sentence in their proposed updated terms and conditions.
Should Instagram's users be surprised at its decision to push the envelope on monetizing its users' content? Since Facebook owns Instagram, is Facebook using Instagram as a testing ground to determine how far they can go with monetizing their users' content before their users revolt? I discussed these issues with Bloomberg Television at the height of this news cycle: The complete fallout from this matter is still yet to be determined. Even though there is a new report that states that Instagram has lost approximately 25% of its daily active users since its announcement that it would change its terms and conditions, it is too soon to speculate if the updated terms and conditions is the main factor. It may be advisable to read the terms and conditions of every digital platform utilized so you don't become a Human Centipad.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2012 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Corporate Counsel's IP Trademark, Copyright & Licensing Forum in New York City
ALM's Corporate Counsel is hosting a conference focused on the legal issues that are inherent with trademark, copyright and licensing. The conference will be held on September 14, and 15th at the Harvard Club of New York City. I have attended several of ALM's intellectual property conferences and each time they have covered very timely topics and have had outstanding faculty.
Some of the topics that will be covered include: trademark enforcement in a global economy, managing intellectual property as an asset, new generic top level domain names, and protecting your brand in the digital age. Some of the companies who will be presenting include: Playboy Enterprises, Inc., ABC, Inc., The New York Times, ESPN, and Macy's.
To learn more about the conference here is the link.
[Full Disclosure-Shear on Social Media Law is part of ALM's Law.com Blog Network]
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Some of the topics that will be covered include: trademark enforcement in a global economy, managing intellectual property as an asset, new generic top level domain names, and protecting your brand in the digital age. Some of the companies who will be presenting include: Playboy Enterprises, Inc., ABC, Inc., The New York Times, ESPN, and Macy's.
To learn more about the conference here is the link.
[Full Disclosure-Shear on Social Media Law is part of ALM's Law.com Blog Network]
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
ALM's 23rd Annual Corporate Counsel Conference East Coast
If you are interested in learning more about some of the legal issues that may affect in-house counsel I encourage you to attend ALM's 23rd Annual Corporate Counsel Conference East Coast. The conference will be held at the Marriott Marquis in New York City on June 7 and June 8th.
Some of the topics that will be addressed include: Trends in Transactions; M&A and Restructurings;
Copyright Law and the Internet's Evolution Continues to Break New Ground; Social Networking and Its Impact on Employment Law; Preparing Your Company for Social Media Attacks; and
Risk Readiness & Information Security in Today's World.
Here is the link to register and this is the link for more information on the sessions that will be offered.
[Full Disclosure: Shear on Social Media Law is part of ALM's Law.com Blog Network]
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Some of the topics that will be addressed include: Trends in Transactions; M&A and Restructurings;
Copyright Law and the Internet's Evolution Continues to Break New Ground; Social Networking and Its Impact on Employment Law; Preparing Your Company for Social Media Attacks; and
Risk Readiness & Information Security in Today's World.
Here is the link to register and this is the link for more information on the sessions that will be offered.
[Full Disclosure: Shear on Social Media Law is part of ALM's Law.com Blog Network]
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
USPTO's Inquiry on Copyright Policy in the Internet Economy Comments Due on 11/19/10
The U.S. Department of Commerce's Internet Policy Task Force is reviewing how copyright law should evolve to balance the needs of content creators and users in the Social Media Age. Since the original Napster came on the scene in 1999, copyright protection has become more difficult for rights holders. Napster's technology created the first widely distributed peer to peer file sharing system that enabled its users to easily share MP3 files. Napster and its progeny such as Limewire (which was shut down a few weeks ago) allowed consumers to download/share music for free. If you were an artist, content creator, or content owner such as a musician, publishing house, record label, movie studio, author, etc... peer to peer file sharing changed your business model almost overnight and made it more difficult to profit from your copyrighted work.
Therefore, those parties that are interested in affecting government policy on copyright protection in the Social Media Age have until November 19, 2010 to file comments about how copyright law should evolve. To file comments electronically you may e-mail them to: copyrightnoi-2010@ntia.doc.gov.
To learn more about copyright protection in the Social Media Age you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.
Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved
Therefore, those parties that are interested in affecting government policy on copyright protection in the Social Media Age have until November 19, 2010 to file comments about how copyright law should evolve. To file comments electronically you may e-mail them to: copyrightnoi-2010@ntia.doc.gov.
To learn more about copyright protection in the Social Media Age you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.
Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)