I have a question similar to this one here ( - I received a
Robert, I have a question similar to this one here (http://www.justanswer.com/intellectual-property-law/a3nth-received-copyright-infringement-notice.html) - I received a letter from a German law firm representing an amateur photographer via www.photoclaim.com, Dear Sir or Madam,I hereby notify you that the photographer Josef Hofer, St. Radegund, has entrusted me with the representation of its legal interests in this specific matter. In my capacity as attorney I hereby verify that I am duly authorized to act in this matter.In the name and on the authority of my client I must inform you of the following state of affairs:I.My client was made aware by www.photoclaim.com that you have published a photograph taken by my client on the website under the URLhttps://lepapierstudio.com/blogs/blog?page=32With this act of publication you have violated the copyrights of my client.The matter in dispute relates to the photograph reproduced in this letter which you are using in breach of the copyrights, with particular reference to the moral rights, of my client.Your website has been secured by our firm to the extent necessary for use as evidence in court and will be produced by way of such evidence in the event that you should contest the claim.No agency that my client works with confirmed a license purchase from your side. Should you have a valid license, please forward us the licensing agreement. Unfortunately you didn't identify my client as the copyright owner as it would be due to any agreement.II.With the publication of the photograph you have acted in violation of the copyrights due to my client as holder of the copyright, in particular the right of distribution pursuant to section 17 of the German Copyright Act (UrhG), as well as the right to make works publicly available pursuant to section 19 a UrhG. There can be no doubt that the photograph is a copyrighted work within the meaning of the Copyright Act.You are not entitled to disseminate the photograph, as you have done in flagrant disregard of the copyrights and moral rights of my client. The appropriation of third-party photographs without the consent of the rights holder represents a violation of copyright law. At no time did my client agree to the publication of the contested photograph in its present form.The deliberate act of incorporating the photograph into your website is sufficient cause for us to assert the contested use by you of the photograph in question. It has no bearing on the claims in the present matter whether the rights of my clients have been deliberately or merely accidentally violated. Instead, the sole focus of the present matter is on the fact that the photograph was used without consent in the manner described above.III.To effectively rule out the risk of any recurrence, it is necessary to issue a cease and desist declaration enforced by penalty for the future.I therefore request that a declaration to cease and desist is submitted by18 May 2017.On the last page of this letter you will find a pre-formulated declaration to cease and desist enforced by penalty, which you are at liberty to use. A jurisdiction clause is common practice that goes beyond the infringement notified. The reimbursement of damages and legal fees is a legal obligation and the placement thereof in the declaration also goes beyond the infringement notified. The reimbursement of damages and legal costs and the declaration to cease and desist are two claims that are not connected to each other. You are, of course, also free to draft your own declaration to cease and desist. I would, however, draw your attention to the risk that an incorrectly or inadequately formulated declaration may not be sufficient to obviate the risk of reoffending.If we do not receive a signed declaration to cease and desist from you by the stipulated deadline, we will assume that you have declined to accept this obligation. In this case I am instructed to take further legal actJA: Do you have a registration record?Customer: nope, it wasn't provided. the image they were referring to was used on a blog post in 2012, along with a source where the image came from attached to it. It wasn't used for commercial use...just a personal blog post.JA: Have you talked to a local attorney? Has anything been filed in court?Customer: I have since taken the image down, BUT i made the mistake to sign the cease and deceit letter - which clearly I didn't read carefully. The letter started I can be responsible for charges . I thought signing the letter and taking the image down was enough. well lawyer emailed back today with thisJA: Anything else you want the lawyer to know before I connect you?Customer: In my last writing, I made you aware of your infringement of my client's copyright. This infringement of my client's copyrights obliges you to pay compensation in pursuance of section 97 UrhG.By the way of license analogy, you have to pay my client the usual licensing fee. To provide a high degree of transparency, my client applies the fees of the MFM-tables (Mittelstandsgemeinschaft Foto-Marketing) that represent an industry average fee and that are taken by the German courts to determine the fair compensation of a photographer. In your case this fee is:Photo 1:Online Use,Subpage26.04.2011 - 05.05.2017930,00 €Subtotal930,00 €Worldwide reach (+120%)1 116,00 €Subtotal2 046,00 €Lack of indication of source (+100%)2 046,00 €Total4 092,00 €Grand Total4 092,00 €According to the law you also have to reimburse my client for the costs incurred by my involvement in this matter through the reimbursement of the business fee pursuant to no. 2300 of the remuneration schedule (VV) appended to the Lawyers' Remuneration Act (RVG), as follows:Value in dispute € 6,000Business feeSections 2, 13, RVG, no. 2300 VV RVG (sentence 1.5)€ 531.00Flat rate expenses no. 7002 VV RVG€ 20.00VAT 19% , § 13 Abs.1 RVG, no. VV 7008€ 104.69Total legal costs€ 655.69You also have to pay for the cost of the documentation of the infringement, which is an amount of EUR 95.00. Our client has ordered the documentation service pixdetect UG to secure evidence usable in court. The documentation costs adequately represent a causal and unavoidable loss for my client and therefore you must reimburse this sum. As our client is not entitled to deduct VAT, note that the number mentioned is merely a net-sum. The full amount is 113.05€.Regarding the eligibility of copyright documentation costs, see those representative examples of the following judgments:AG Hamburg, Entscheidung vom 13.03.2012, Az. 26a C 84/12, AG Hamburg, Entscheidung vom 14.06.2012, Az. 35a C 40/12, AG Hamburg, Urteil vom 17.10.2011, Az. 36A C 368/10, AG Berlin-Charlottenburg, Urteil vom 29.11.2012, Az. 210 C 63/12, AG Stuttgart, Urteil vom 26.09.2012, Az. 50 C 4382/11, AG Berlin-Charlottenburg, Urteil vom 20.11.2012, Az. 225 C 196/12, AG Berlin-Charlottenburg, Urteil vom 02.09.2014, Az. 225 C 34/14, AG Berlin-Charlottenburg, Urteil vom 05.02.2009, Az. 239 C 282/08, AG Berlin-Charlottenburg, Urteil vom 08.08.2013, Az. 210 C 6/13, AG Stuttgart, Urteil vom 10.7.2012, Az. 2 C 3327/11, AG München, Entscheidung vom 31.03.2010, Az. 161 C 15642/09, AG Charlottenburg, Entscheidung vom 29.11.2012, Az. 201 C 273/12, LG Hamburg, Entscheidung vom 17.04.2009, Az. 308 O 612/08.You are therefore required to make a total payment of:DamagesDocumentation€ 4 092.00€ 113.05Legal fees€ 655.69Grand total€ 4 860.74We expect receipt of this amount no later than 29 May 2017 to the bank account stated on the first page of this letter. Should you fail to make the above-mentioned payment by the specified deadline, my client instructed me to take further legal action.Sincerely,Filipp Bickel--Rechtsanwalt Filipp J.A. BickelAttorney at Law (Germany)Philippistr. 814059 BerlinTel.: 0170 / 77 46 404Fax: 0049 32 12 77 88 889eMail:***@******.***Web: ra-filipp-bickel.deIBAN: DE69100500000190169737BIC: BELADEBEXXXThis e-mail including its attachments contains confidential and/or privileged information intended only for the use of the named recipient and is subject to the attorney-client privilege. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) delete it.
I have a website that collects alot of user-generated
I have a website that collects alot of user-generated content. It is text only content - no images or files. On my website, I do have a DMCA page that has the basic information for a user to file a DMCA complaint should they determine content posted by a user is in violation.Recently, I've been getting notices from Google Search that a DMCA complaint has been filed against individual pages (each piece of user content gets its own url, ie: example.com\123abc). According to the notification from Google, the url is removed from Google Search. They give a link to lumendatabase.org that has a copy of the DMCA notification filed to them. In the notices I've read, the submitter information is usually redacted, and the link on my site is usually one of hundreds of other links in the same notice.Question 1 - is this a valid DMCA notice for MY site to take the content down. I'm guessing the path of least resistance is to pull the content down since a notice was filed somewhere? However, am I really protected by DMCA if a proper notice is not filed with me? If I don't pull it down, is it a defendable position that a DMCA notice wasn't sent directly to me? Since this site generates a fair amount of data, I rely on user report submissions (or official DMCA notices) to monitor and remove any content that violates DMCA or terms of service.Question 2 - since this site doesn't host files or create links, alot of the notices seems to relate to people posting information of where links to downloadable content can be found. So someone may post some text that says "download some file from http://someothersite.com/12312/something" .. The link to someothersite.com is NOT clickable. Is that content really a risk for a copyright violation?Thoughts?
Just a quick question. I am an elementary teacher and I have
Just a quick question. I am an elementary teacher and I have a personal education website that has cost me over $1300 to date (5 years) to get it up and running, trouble shoot, yearly fees, etc. I LOVE the site and spend a good 20+ hours a week updating it, revising, etc.You cannot believe the amount of teachers who blatantly copy and paste my work onto their websites w/o citing me. I discover this via Copyscape and Google text searches. Most add me in, others ignore me, and others simply cite who I cited but not acknowledge at all that I was the one who paraphrased the information.QUESTION: If I paraphrase information, and include direct quotes, and cite my sources ~ can another person legally copy and paste my page without mentioning me as a source? Some teachers say, "this is DRA2 information" ~ yes, it is, and I cited it as so, but I created the tables of information, and I summarized and paraphrased what was copied onto other people's pages. . . . CAN I ASK THEM TO CITE ME OR NOT? Thank you!