By Matthew B. Harrison
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. –– In a recent article, Michael Harrison predicted that Intellectual Property Law would dominate talk radio’s legal concerns in the era that is unfolding. (It is filed at www.talkers.com under Michael Harrison and is titled “The Ticking of the Clock.”)
As talk programming evolves into new means of digital distribution through advances in technology, so does our need to understand intellectual property. While evolutionary, the nature of the rights themselves –– to control and exploit the products of one’s creativity and innovation –– remains consistent, the manner by which they are expressed and exchanged is constantly attempting to adapt to advances in technology.
The invention of, in turn, the printing press, the phonograph, radio and television broadcasting, cable, transmission from satellite, VCRs, CDs, DVDs, and now the internet has affected both the form and the substance in the interpretation of intellectual property rights.
by Matthew B. Harrison, Esq.
Harrison Legal Group
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. –– Understanding ownership rights of audio content is one of the more common issues to cross my desk. While most of the information that exists on the topic, including court cases and their analysis, is centered on music-based audio, the rules can be similarly applied to both spoken- or music-based content. Therefore, this article will examine the application of such rules to music and aptly apply them to spoken-word content.
A work made for hire is defined as a work created by an employee within the scope of the employee’s employment. A work made for hire can also be created by a contractual agreement between two parties.
Memories of Unsoiled Decay
A camera sees differently than our eyes do and can be used as a means to communicate a story. For most artists – the story goes beyond themselves and capturing moments from their lives and the literal content contained within the frame. The photographs no longer reveal literal truth but instead present a metaphor for a greater truth. The viewer is engaged in identifying the metaphor and appreciating the relationship that the photographer has demonstrated with the subject. This portfolio is both. However, there is a third component of this portfolio that makes it worthy of being the work product of a Masters Degree Scholar: these photographs were specifically created in such a way as to maximize a viewers engagement with these images. I applied scientific research to my photographic process – in order to maximize the portfolio’s ability to engage the viewer.
By Matthew B. Harrison, esq.
PhotosAndTheLaw.com
Last month, this column detailed the four factors of the fair use defense to copyright infringement. The prior column addressed how to use the provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in order to protect your audio (and video) from misuse. Both of these articles generated enough reader feedback and follow up questions, that it seemed like a good idea to provide a summary article with some additional clarifications.
The first two, and the most straightforward, of four factors of a fair use defense to copyright infringement are:
· The nature of the copyrighted work; and
· The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole;
and the two that led to the most follow up are:
· The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; and
· The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
THE INTERNET AS A DOUBLE EDGED SWORD
Protect yourself while getting the most out of the promotional opportunities
By Matthew B. Harrison, esq.
PhotosAndTheLaw.com
How many of you have your own website that showcases your photography? How many of you use other websites – such as myspace, deviantart, webshots, flickr, etc – to display your work? The Internet can be an amazingly inexpensive way for you, as a photographer, to 1) be able to showcase your work and 2) hopefully bring in potential business through these self-promotional efforts. However, before you run out and get yourself a website to showcase your images, I would like you to think about protecting yourself and your property, so that you do not end up falling into the group that answers affirmatively to the next question.
Of those who do display their work online – how many of you have had the pleasant experience of surfing the web and seeing your image somewhere without your permission? Unfortunately, it happens more than any of us would like to admit and you need to be aware of this phenomenon so that you can adequately protect yourself.
Copyright: How much is too much – in terms of avoiding liability.
by Matthew B. Harrison, Esq.
PhotosAndTheLaw.com
In my legal practice, I focus on the unique legal issues facing photographers and artists. Lesley Arak of FNS Studios in Springfield asked me recently an interesting copyright related question that I felt would provide interesting fodder for an article. The question was “If I wanted to recreate a famous photograph, and I hired a model, a stylist, acquired the right outfit, and created an image that looked a lot like the original – would I be in violation of the original photographer’s copyright?”
In thinking about the answer, even more questions arose in my mind. Would it make any difference if the original image were not a photograph at all – but perhaps a drawing or painting? What if the original photograph was not of a person – but rather was of a location or an object – would it matter if a photographer took a similar picture of the same subject matter?
Protecting your intellectual property
A look at the Trademark
By Matthew B. Harrison, esq.
PhotosAndTheLaw.com
As an arts and entertainment attorney, I find myself counseling clients with an ongoing mantra consisting of “protect your intellectual property.” Intellectual property (IP) refers to a legal entitlement that sometimes attaches to the expressed form of an idea, or to some other intangible subject matter. The term IP reflects the idea that the subject matter being protected is the product of the mind or the intellect, and that IP rights may be protected at law in the same way as any other form of property (even though the property may be intangible).
In the case of an artist, intellectual property may be all that they really have in terms of assets. An artists name as a manner in which their clients may identify their work, and the copyright protection that exist in the work, are two types of IP that immediately come to mind.
