image copyrighting

[mazz gambardella]

I'm sure this has already come up in a post but is there anyway I can copyright my images and illustrations? Only because I found a person wearing a t-shirt with one of my images on it, she made it herself and found my website randomly.

Someone told me by posting your images in the post to yourself works but I've lost an a few pictures because of the shitty mail!

Is there a better way than this?

[JustinHelton]

put a copyright logo on it...done

[necro]

if the person made the shirt for themselves and didnt sell it it to anyone, is that still copyright infringement?

[Ruthless Cow]

The "poor man's copyright" doesn't work.

In the USA your work is automatically protected by copyright law. You don't even have to put a copyright notice on it.

Check this link out for the basics:

U.S. Copyright Office - Copyright in General (FAQ)

[Nicholas Wilson]

when you create something, it has a copyright, regardless of what you do.

putting a symbol on it doesn't really do anything more, just keeps a large amount of people who have no idea from taking it.

mailing yourself copies of it is a poor mans patent, not copyright. it proves time of creation and idea, but isn't that great in court.

when putting stuff on your website, don't put high res scans. if it's all computer work, place a water mark in it, or if you're making your own shirts, get someone to model it.

there are several things you can do to keep people from duplicating your stuff off your website.

in all reality, if it's just a few people, be glad that you're stuff is getting out there.

[Ruthless Cow]

Yeah - legally she's wrong to copy your work - even if it is just for her own personal use - but suing her is probably not going to be worth it.

[stargrazer]

I think it gets messy in the graphic design arena because so much imagery is based on collage, precedent, reference, satire, etc. These are all valid tools, and many, many artistic pieces borrow from advertising, fine art, iconic photographs, ironic juxtapositions... Clearly it's wrong to jack an image that isn't in public domain. Some would say even using a pub domain image is artistically null -- it should all come from "within." I kind of think the idea that things come from within is bullshit.

I've been moving more and more toward using my own paintings, photos, illustrations etc. for surfaces and imagery rather than using stuff from texture websites, google-collage, etc. But I still borrow a lot of inspiration just by having my eyes open and absorbing things I find beautiful visceral, or skillful. I'm sure I'm guilty somewhere along the path.

But on the same token (I think I'm straying from the topic at hand here, so I'll wrap this up) the idea of ownership of an image that isn't 100% hand-crafted and without ANY antecedent somewhere in commercial design or art history troubles me a bit.

You deserve fair protection for your work. But it's on a T-shirt somewhere and people are seeing it. I don't know how you felt about this upon encountering her but I'd be flattered. If Hot Topic was cranking them out, that's a different arena. Protectionism has always been the attitude of like, nature photographers -- who, in my opinion, just put rectangles around pre-existing stuff.

Sorry to behave philosophically toward your serious, legally-based inquiry (Didn't I say I was going to wrap up?). If you feel offended by this infraction with the T-shirt, take action. If you feel flattered, or ambiguous, use it as an opportunity to appear generous: "Hey, I'm really glad you liked my poster enough to make a T-shirt. Please don't make any more or sell them, and do me a favor and let people know who I am if they ask about your shirt. By the way, I'm a working artist, and we depend on support -- if you'd like more of my work, I sell it online (etc. etc....)"