Corbis Copyright Complaint

Corbis email | 04/16/04 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

Dear FReepers,

As most of you know, there was some recent media and internet excitement regarding some photos and images of Jane Fonda and John Kerry, some real, and some parodied. Some of these photos and images were copyrighted material controlled by Corbis or derivatives of Corbis copyrighted material. We received a copyright complaint some time back from Corbis and immediately removed all posts we could find containing links to these images.

We've now received another complaint. Apparently, we missed a few, so now we've done another search a found and deleted all we could find. Corbis is also complaining about posted links of these images that are hosted on newsmax.com, indymedia.com and totallysweetpixels.com.

John wrote a script to search our database of posts and removed all of these he could find.

We want to cooperate and fully comply with Corbis's wishes not to have any of their copyrighted material linked from Free Republic, even if it is linked from a third party server.

Please do not post links to any Corbis photos or images, regardless of where they may be hosted. Please let us know through the abuse reporting system if you see or know of any Corbis material that has been posted or linked to Free Republic.

Thanks very much.

Regards,

Jim Robinson

[Dales]

Seems to me the easy answer is, just link to pictures.

That way, there is no worry. And it is nice for the people who have dialups.

[Alas Babylon!]

You weren't here when the LA Times/Wash Post sued Free Republic (and therefore JimRob). Anyway, we all thought we had a great case. It was "Fair Use" all the way. (I personally still think it does.) FReeper lawyers gave pro bono time to represent us. We still lost, in the eyes of the Clinton-appointed liberal judge. The judgement sucked. It was appealed, IIRC, and we still lost. Jim doesn't have the funds to take it all the way to the Supremes, so he settled.

Anyway, what is JimRob to do? The LA Times/Wash Post settlement could have cost him a fortune that he doesn't have. JimRob doesn't need the heartache of that all over again.

[gogeo]

I wouldn't advise getting into a deep pockets contest with Bill Gates.

[Jim Robinson]

I simply do not want to have anything to do with Corbis. There is no need for their images or links to appear on FR.
Thanks,
Jim

[ElkGroveDan]

Read the message above again. They say we can't even link.

[Cboldt]

Good questions. A ban on linking is simply absurd.

I read Jim's request more closely, and probably, more narrowly read, the request is to not do either of the following, where the URL is a CORBIS image:

Type http:/www.somesite.somewhere.com/folder/corbis-image.jpg

Make an href link of the above.

Note that each of those is a reference to an image, not a reference to a page that may or may not have a link to a Corbis-controlled image.

[chainsaw]

Just take your photos and email them around the country. It would be impossible to tell where they originated.

[Sloth]

Yes, but it still requires some magical knowledge of where the 3rd-party site acquired the image. We're only going to know it's from Corbis if it's overtly attributed or if the watermark is still shown.

[Prime Choice]

You weren't here when the LA Times/Wash Post sued Free Republic (and therefore JimRob). Anyway, we all thought we had a great case. It was "Fair Use" all the way.

Reprinting articles in full is not protected by Fair Use. Excerpting and quoting is. That's why we can still link to the articles and post the opening paragraph or two.

This case is different. The infringing material is not hosted on Free Republic (as was the case when full articles were reproduced here). It is another matter entirely.

[hispanarepublicana]

I never knew that merely hyperlinking to an image was a copyright infringement.......Can websites also keep someone from publishing hyperlinks to them?

[Cboldt]

Yes, but it still requires some magical knowledge of where the 3rd-party site acquired the image. We're only going to know it's from Corbis if it's overtly attributed or if the watermark is still shown.

True, but it's alot easier to refrain from posting references to image URL's (except where one knows the copyrights that pertain to the image), than it is to refrain from posting any URL that might, in turn, link to a Corbis-controlled image.

I notice I left out one method of reference to an image URL in my previous, and that is the <img= > method.

[ProfoundMan]

We should do exactly as Jim asks. Check here
http://pro.corbis.com/creative/services/media/ (hope I can post a page link!) "Metadata" and "Digital Asset Management" are real stinkers!! These guys are GOOD at this, let's leave 'em alone.

[Enduring Freedom]

Tell them to shove it.

[Enduring Freedom]

I would like to ask them the following:

WHO DID YOU VOTE FOR? ANSWER THE QUESTION! ARE YOU A DEMOCRAT? ARE YOU? ANSWER!

[Political Junkie Too]

Is it okay of one types "http://www.corbis.com" into a message?

That may become the defacto compromise at some point. That way, the address is provided but it is not a hot link. The reader will have to copy the address and paste it into the address field of their browser and click go. If the choose not to, then it is just freeform text.

-PJ

[Prime Choice]

Some case law of interest.

Ford Motor Company v. 26000 Enterprises, Case No 01'CV'71685'DT (EDMI Dec. 20, 2001) Mere link from 2600 website, critical of Ford Motor Company, to Ford Motor Company, is not actionable.
http://www.2600.com/news/122201-files/ford-dec.html

Ticketmaster v. Tickets.com , No 99-07654 (CD Cal 1999) (deep linking does not equal unfair competition) http://www.gigalaw.com/library/ticketmaster-tickets-2000-08-10-p1.html

Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, Inc., 75 FSuoo2d 1290 (D Utah 1999) Knowingly linking to infringing content constitutes contributory infringement.
(Comment: Thus, the issue goes not against FR, but the poster. And even then, Corbis would have to prove that the poster knowingly linked to copyrighted material. If argued otherwise, then the DUmmie brigade could easily get FR in hot water by creating loads of accounts and going Corbis link-happy.)
http://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/cjoyce/copyright/release10/IntRes.html

[Enduring Freedom]

BILL GATES OWNS CORBIS?

That ungrateful pr#ck - perhaps his Socialist parasite friends want another shot at his fortune.

He is lucky Bush won - he would be a maggot salesman by now.

How can someone with so much money be so stupid?

[Prime Choice]

If it were simply a matter of linking to stuff on the Corbis site, then it'd be easily remedied. But Corbis is now holding FR's feet to the fire if some third party abuses Corbis's copyright and some FR poster links to it.

This alone places undue and unreasonable prior restraint on both FR management (with respect to and including FR users) who may link to a non-Corbis site which may (or may not) have Corbis-derived images that are not thus marked.

This isn't just about copyright. This is actionable infringement on the First Amendment.

[Rebelbase]

The scrubbing and purging of an the FR news archive continues. Given time, we will be reduced to excerpts only.

[BushisTheMan]

Crybaby Corbis!