P Susan Booth-Warning Copywrited John

[Shiva]

Actually, in Canada, a copyright is granted the moment a work is created. There is no need to register it.

True, but registering the copyright for my book cost me $50. My american editor added an international copyright. I don't know the cost since it was included in the contract deal we signed. The book is to be published next february or there about. I couldn't imagine letting it go in the world without proper protection.

 

[Clark]

Copyright fees are a cheap condom.

 

[John M]

I couldn't imagine letting it go in the world without proper protection.

Agreed. If your intended market includes places other than Canada, you're wise to play the game and pay the fees to properly protect it beyone Canada's borders.

 

[SlipperKing]

Now this is the kind of stimulating conversations we love a round here! See what a fuss over insufficient watermark can bring about?!?:clap::clap::clap:

 

[gonewild]

True, but registering the copyright for my book cost me $50. My american editor added an international copyright. I don't know the cost since it was included in the contract deal we signed. The book is to be published next february or there about. I couldn't imagine letting it go in the world without proper protection.

Paying copyright on one book for $50 is no problem but would you pay out $2500 to copyright 50 photos you shot yesterday?

 

[Clark]

Lance,
how did you get that cost?

Or, did I overlook something in the copyright guidelines?

 

[gonewild]

Lance,
how did you get that cost?

Or, did I overlook something in the copyright guidelines?

I just used Shiva's cost for the book copyright ($50) and multiplied it by 50 individual photos. I don't know if it is actually the cost or not but the point is that NO photographer can afford to copyright all their photos even if the cost was only a $1. All the registered copyright does is give a slight advantage in court. The big issue is that to enforce a copyright you have to be able to afford or justify the attorney fees. At best if you prevailed in an infringement case you might be awarded 5 times the normal "use" fee for the image. The sad fact is that most photos have no commercial value and so 5 times market value is not much. For example when someone uses your image on ebay what are your damages? The court will ask you to show what the image has earned in the past to determine if the unauthorized use has caused you any damage to the photos value. Unless it is an exceptional (rare) photo the damage would be zero.

Photo copyrights are about as good as a patent....unless you have the financial resources to enforce it what good is it?

 

[Candace]

Thanks, I needed the laugh today!

 

[Ruli]

Somebody told me that some orchid hybrids are "copyrighted". Is it true?

 

[Shiva]

Somebody told me that some orchid hybrids are "copyrighted". Is it true?

Hybrids are registered at the Royal Horticultural Society under a name provided by the registrant. It can be the person who made the cross or someone else, preferably after obtaining the permision of the former. It is indeed a form of copyright because every other hybrid made with the same parents will therefore share the registered name. The same hybrid can have another name after the first if it has won an award, like Phrag, Don Wimber ''Barbara'' AM/AOS. That name is also registered which means only that plant and its divisions can share the awarded name.

 

[John M]

Plants (including orchids), with a high commercial value and which can be propagated by cloning, are routinely patented.

The thing about the RHS hybrid name registrations is that the names are not protected by law. The RHS has no legal authority to force us to recognise and use the registered names. Commercial nurseries commonly drop the correct, registered name and replace it with their own trade name. For example: I could have a bench full of Paph. Ho Chi Minh and put labels in them that says "Paph. Marcotte's Pink Beauty". I could do that with everything I sell, if I wanted. I could add "Marcotte's" in front of all the names and develop a brand recognition in the market place for my stuff. The RHS and the person who registered the name HCM can't do anything about that.

Another example: I used to be the North American agent for Alba Labs in South Africa. I imported Disa seedlings (and as it turned out, mostly killed them!). One of the named clones that I got from them was Disa Rosy Face; but, "Rosy Face" is a trade name, not an RHS registered name. Alba Labs' Disa Rosy Face is actually Disa unidiorosa and it's been given the clonal name of 'Rosy Face'; but, they chose to drop the correct hybrid name (unidiorosa) and just go with the clonal name. This is done A LOT in Europe! The quality of the European plants is very high; but, the names are so often just a trade name, not the true RHS registered name. You'll notice that a lot of our European members are frequently posting photos of plants that they bought at a local store; but, it came without a name or a trade name and not a name that is registered with the RHS. So, they show it to us in the hopes of figuring out it's "real" RHS registered name.

 

[Clark]

I just used Shiva's cost for the book copyright ($50) and multiplied it by 50 individual photos. I don't know if it is actually the cost or not but the point is that NO photographer can afford to copyright all their photos even if the cost was only a $1. All the registered copyright does is give a slight advantage in court. The big issue is that to enforce a copyright you have to be able to afford or justify the attorney fees. At best if you prevailed in an infringement case you might be awarded 5 times the normal "use" fee for the image. The sad fact is that most photos have no commercial value and so 5 times market value is not much. For example when someone uses your image on ebay what are your damages? The court will ask you to show what the image has earned in the past to determine if the unauthorized use has caused you any damage to the photos value. Unless it is an exceptional (rare) photo the damage would be zero.

Photo copyrights are about as good as a patent....unless you have the financial resources to enforce it what good is it?

My mistake, I thought the discussion was leaning towards the cost of registering literary and visual art.


The way I understood the difference between not registering, and registering one's work with copyright office in Washington, DC was that-

not registering- artist foots the bill if it goes to litigation in court.
registered work- artist sues for damages and litigation costs.

In a nutshell, that is how it was explained to me.


Anyway, with bulk registration online, several hundred can be registered for $35.
One of the instructions I found online helped a bit-
http://asmp.org/tutorials/best-practices.html

It was easy to read. On the government's site, the info is a little confusing the first time reading.

I am not a member of the above organization.

 

[Shiva]

The thing about the RHS hybrid name registrations is that the names are not protected by law. The RHS has no legal authority to force us to recognise and use the registered names.

That's because the original reason for registering plants had to do with conventions. The species got their names in latin because every erudite spoke latin at the time, and no one wanted the same plant, and eventually the same hybrid, to have different names. Everybody agreed because it was common sense. I don't even think the copyright concept existed then. Now, with the great popularity or orchids, some who trade in orchids don't feel the need to follow the rules. They didn't before with ''normal'' plants and they won't change now that orchids are a popular trend.
Of course, we, as serious and knowledgable folks still abide by the old rules. We like them, we understand them (with a few exceptions) and I, for one, won't buy a Paph. Addicted Philipp under the name of Spiderwink Orchid or any made up name.

 

[John M]

.....and I, for one, won't buy a Paph. Addicted Philipp under the name of Spiderwink Orchid or any made up name.

I'm with you on that. I wish the trade name trend had never happened. A lot of nice plants are being reproduced in bulk and sent out into the world with bogus names by commercial pot plant production nurseries. They don't care about the integrity of our naming system or the importance of it in the long term. I complained to Alba Labs about the trade names on the Disas. They finally gave me a key; so that I could identify the correct RHS registered name from looking at the trade name. In the end, the problem solved itself, for me anyway; because I couldn't keep the darned things alive anyway.