COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT IS A SERIOUS VIOLATION OF THE LAW.
What is copyright?
Copyright is a form of protection grounded in the U.S. Constitution and granted by law for original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright covers both published and unpublished works. More . . .
- (c) Statutory Damages. -
- (1) Except as provided by clause (2) of this subsection, the copyright owner may elect, at any time before final judgment is rendered, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the action, with respect to any one work, for which any one infringer is liable individually, or for which any two or more infringers are liable jointly and severally, in a sum of not less than $750 or more than $30,000 as the court considers just. For the purposes of this subsection, all the parts of a compilation or derivative work constitute one work.
- (2) In a case where the copyright owner sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that infringement was committed willfully, the court in its discretion may increase the award of statutory damages to a sum of not more than $150,000.
A legal copyright holder can grant a license to another person to use their copyright protected works, HOWEVER, a person who infringes on a copyright cannot grant permission or license for others to use. Nor can a person who has illegally violated a lawful copyright holder's property, "release" such property "into the public domain".
Licensing
 |
I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. This applies worldwide.
In case this is not legally possible,
I grant any entity the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law. |
On several occassions, I have seen images on ActiveRain posts with the caption "From Wikipedia Public Domain" Since I'm not interested in using content, images, photos or other works created by anyone other than myself, I paid little attention. UNTIL a few days ago when I discovered one of my maps included in a post on Wikipedia complete with the notice that the writer owned the map and was releaseing it into the public domain.
When I discovered the copyright violation, I edited the Wikipedia page with a WARNING that the map included on the page was duly registered with the Copyright Office and the writer who posted it violated the law. I included the Copyright Registration Number in my Notice.
Today, I found that my map was still included on the page but my Warning was gone. I also had mail from a Wilipedia person that my editi to the page was improper and that I had to go through channels to achieve my goal. Seems to me that when a copyright owner disputes the "public domain" of an entry, the burden should be on the entity that posted the original images, article, etc.
I will contact the entity that posted my map and pursue it directly. However, this experience reminded me of how many times I have read ActiveRain members post an interesting image and include the notice: From Wikipedia Public Domain.
That notice should not give one comfort. In fact, it could easily be a set-up.
Map of the Patriot District
Courtesy, Lenn Harley, Broker, Homefinders.com, 800-711-7988.
;)
;)
I haven't done that, but glad you pointed it out.