Someone Used My Photo On Ebay

also keep in mind, ebay itself also combs through photos, and uses them in their catalogs. Hence this is the reason ebay tried to stop people from using watermarks..

Kevin,

To clarify, first it was not the owner that sued. It was a family member who was not the legal representative of the original photographer.

More specifically you stated ( paraphrasing) that no person need do any research to determine which of the billions of images are, or are not copyrighted. Since all images created since 1950 are currently copyrighted; then no research is necessary to determine which is copyrighted. The natural assumption is that ALL personal pictures are copyrighted.

Thirdly, depending on your jurisdiction a Court can and will take this matter up. Is it worth it? Probably not. Especially in an issue involving possible interstate matters. Can it happen? Yes.

I'm not trying to put you down. It sounds like you might think I am. That is not my intention.

I'm an Engineer. I tend to cringe at absolutes. As a former Interviewer I'm well aware that rarely is ignorance of the law a defense. However; as Bobby pointed out you give up your rights with ebay. Something I did not know. ( shrugs)

@jmkendall wrote:




I don't think @jmkendall is trying to put me down. I do think @jm is trying to call me wrong and prove so using naught but ambiguity.

@jm wrote:




And then @jm recounted a court experience.

Unable to discern which of my "that's" wants for correction, I penned my understanding of @jm's experience and asked how @jm's experience in any way relates to my errant and yet elusive "that?"

@jm's next offering is




That visits me as both irrelevant to my rectitude and also baffling. The plaintiff had to assert some claim of ownership to be granted standing to sue by the court.

@jm next offered:




@bobby131313 eloquently disproves the first part. I'd still like to know how this fact in any way relates to my errant and still elusive "that?"To my mind, @jm's "assumption" simply adds "not nececssary" to my "not required."

@jm paraphrased me thus:




I'll conclude: I have owned a lot of intellectual property. In addition to trademarks and copy rights, I've been issued very many, perhaps thirty, U.S. and international patents (don't know why, but my favorite one is that issued by the Soviet Union). Trust me or don't to know the bounds of intellectual property ownership. A copyright is a piece of intellectual property.

It is the sole responsibility of the intellectual property owner to inform the public s/he owns it. It is the informed member of the public's responsibility to respect the ownership. With the exception of those obvious instances where personal property and intellectual property overlap (family photos, for instance) members of the public whom the owner fails to inform have no responsibility whatsoever to respect or even contemplate that some owner may be entitled intellectual property rights.

Kevin

Thank you Attorney @Zurie I stand humbled and corrected.

Kevin