Your photos may not be protected if copyright application is still in progress
Aug 1, 2017
Share:
Italy-based photojournalist Matilde Gattoni recently got the result of her lawsuit against clothing retailer Tibi. Now that the judge has made the decision, it may be of interest for all photographers.
While copyright registration of Gattoni’s photo in the US was still in progress, Tibi changed her photo and posted it on their Instagram page. After she sued for copyright infringement and violation of Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the court dismissed the charges of copyright infringement.
As Lexicology writes, the photographer captured a colorful building in Essaouira, Morocco, with a woman in a long dress walking down the street. In August 2016, she posted the photo on her Instagram page with a copyright notice. A month later, Tibi cropped the photo to remove the woman and posted the altered version on their Instagram page without the photographer’s permission. They removed the copyright notice, but linked Gattoni’s Instagram profile.
As I mentioned, Gattoni sued for copyright infringement and violation of the DMCA. The lawsuit requested statutory damages of up to $150,000 for copyright infringement, and $2,500 to $25,000 for the DMCA violation. Tibi moved to dismiss the suit, and the judge issued a mixed opinion on the defendant’s motion – the DMCA violation charge moves forward, but he didn’t find Tibi guilty of copyright infringement.
There are four requirements to claim for copyright infringement: the subject was an original work, the photographer owns the copyright in that work, the copyright was registered in accordance with the statute, and the defendant acted to infringe the copyright. Gattoni meets three requirements, expect for the registration. She filed for it, but when Tibi used her photo without permission, the application was still pending. Hence the judge’s decision that Tibi isn’t guilty of copyright infringement.
According to Lexicology, courts are split when it comes to pending copyright registration. The Judge on Gattoni vs. Tibi case, Robert W. Sweet, explains: “Some courts have taken an ‘application approach,’ under which a pending copyright registration application is sufficient to satisfy Section 411(a), while others have taken a ‘registration approach,’ under which a certificate of registration issued by the Copyright Office is a prerequisite to suit.” According to him, in Gattoni’s case, the court went for the “registration approach.” This means it was necessary for the photographer to submit either a valid copyright registration, or evidence that she filed for registration, but it was refused.
As for the DMCA claim, the court noted that the copyright registration doesn’t affect the decision in this case. She fulfilled the requirements to file against Tibi: “she demonstrated the existence of the copyright management information on her photograph, the removal and/or alteration of that information, and that the removal and/or alteration was done intentionally.”
Although the court has denied in part and granted in part the defendant’s motion, they granted Gattoni 60 days to show the evidence of copyright registration. She will have time to either show a valid copyright registration of the photo in question, or the rejection of her copyright registration application.
This case is important for all photographers who filed for the copyright registration of their work. If it’s still pending, you can sue for DMCA violation and most likely win. But if the court goes with the “registration approach,” it means your photos aren’t protected against copyright infringement until the registration is either complete or rejected.
[Gattoni v. Tibi, LLC. via Lexology]
Dunja Đuđić
Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, concerts, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.





































Join the Discussion
DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.
15 responses to “Your photos may not be protected if copyright application is still in progress”
WTF? I have to register my work somewhere? Countless sources before have said that copyright is granted automatically.. which way is it?
I’m not too familiar with the US law (I’m neither a lawyer nor US citizen). But from what I’ve learned so far, copyright IS granted automatically for photos. However, it turns out there are some perks in court if you register the copyright after all: https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#automatic
in USA in order to claim anything creative the copyright registration AND APPROVAL OF it has to be in place…
Worse than China, then.
Excuse my ignorance. Copyright registration? So you have to submit every photograph to be registered. Well…
yup you can submit any amount of YOUR photos… the fee is $200 per registration action (not per photo)
and believe me worth every cent…
I’d love some clarification on said topic as well. Preferably with a link. My search resulted in some sites taking money for the aforementioned registration but I don’t see any proof that registration is indeed needed.
“the copyright was registered in accordance with the statute”
No that is not what the text of the law says for the US at least. Initial ownership vests initially with the author or authors of the work.
https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap2.html
201. Ownership of copyright1
(a) Initial Ownership.—Copyright in a work protected under this title vests initially in the author or authors of the work. The authors of a joint work are coowners of copyright in the work.
Throwing out the suit is probably throwing out the damages one can collect if you actually register the works. That is not the same thing as saying someone doesn’t own the copyright.
As soon as you press the shutter the image belongs to you
That is simply not true.
Depends on the country of which you are the subject. In EU, there’s no such register. The copyright law grants the rights to the creator of art.
they are protected as soon as you hit the shutter…
Looks like there is something fishy going on. Incapable or bribed judge. Or plain stupid. Either way, this person has to been removed and banned a lifetime for this kind of job.
There is _no_ registration needed for a copyright/ownership to be active.
“Ownership exists at the moment of creation.”
And a simple RAW file with META (in case of photography) is enough to prove ownership.
Don’t let you be fooled by this strange and absurd behaviour.
You don’t know what you’re talking about… the instant you produce an image, you own the rights to it whether it’s registered or not.
This article draws a larger, general conclusion from specific facts that distinguish it from a general trend of copyright. The artist substantially transformed her own work that was subject to the pending copyright application. Thus, auto-transformational copyright is more the issue, and cannot readily be distinguished from the procedural copyright issues. Therefore, the conclusion of the article is likely erroneous.