Copyright Blacklist Website

[jujubee]

Someone from China sent me an email looking for work the other day. They offered low prices and some good renderings. Only problem is that some of their renderings were stolen from a company up in Canada and I reported it to them.

The same thing happened to Giraffe two weeks ago. We all have instances of this going back this past year.

I've been thinking about this. Many of these people are beyond legal reach since they are in other countries. And even the ones here - it's not worthwhile to pursue a company because the legal costs are too high. Architects and developers are sending these people work - I think they should be held accountable for their actions.

So what would you all say if I was to come up with a website that was completely free (run by some ads to support hosting) for people to post the names of individuals/companies that use stolen works of art? A blacklist? Would you use it?

A site like that brings up many legal issues. I wouldn't want people wrongly accusing others of theft. Just for running a site like that, I could see lawsuits coming at me for defamation. But on the same note, I also believe in freedom of speech - and I shouldn't be held liable for what others freely post. If someone thinks they are wrongly accused, then I suppose they could post wireframes or other evidence that they created 'their' pieces.

So is this a good idea or bad idea? I don't see any other way to prevent this from happening short of the government getting involved.

[mike.edel]

at least over here there are clear rules that you can be liable for content on your forum:
normally you are not liable for other user's posts
if another user posts something that breaks the law (i.e. in your case he is wrongly accusing someone of stealing his work) you are not liable

BUT: if you notice this post or even get notified by the defamed(?) person you have to remove the post or you can be held reliable
there still are lawsuits going on about this, even with highly regarded it magazines that regularly have problems with their news forums

i guess this really could escalate into a flame/post war between the parties involved - and you (or the forum admin) would be in the middle

[jujubee]

Well what is the other option - let people steal your work and yell at them? I'm trying to find a fair solution for everyone. But I see what you are saying - it's very complicated...

[jow]

The thing i dont get is you get these ppl stealing work, posting it on there sites saying, oh look how good my work is! Then you get some poor client has some work done by them and its of no where near the quality that is advertised on there site, they must be well gutted!!!
You'd get strunge up for it here in the UK, its just false advertising..
I say go for it!!!

My 2 pennys!!!!

[jujubee]

I'd really like to go for it... But worry about getting sued in this country.

[mmikee]

Well, if it can be done legally, I think its a good idea. Heck, I would link to
it every time I post on the major 3d sites. Mabey it would curb some of
this nonsense. As far as I know none of my work has been stolen (then again, its not that great) but i would be P***ED if I saw my work on
someone elses site.
I say go for it. Even if you dont out right say "stolen", you could let people
judge for themselves by seeing the images and sites themselves. I saw a website that compared web designs that had obviously been copied. I
dont think they were coming right out and saying thievery, but it was up
the viewer to make up there mind.

All in all, I think it is a great idea if done properly.

[yeohyip]

I guess you need to be careful about making conclusions based on anything other than factual events - which means contacting both parties and seeing which one can produce the WIPs.

Maybe you could do it blogstyle. And present the events as you experience it - seeing the copied images, bringing up the issue with the portfolio owners (both orignal and copy), and the responses that follows after. That way it's just a chronoligical list of events that really happened. But regardless of how well you do it, legal threats are still probably going happen.

The problem with letting others freely post is that you may get some false cases, which can ruin the reputation of someone even if the accusation is found to be false at the end, many people just read the headlines only.

Not an easy thing to police, but it is a good cause.

[plastic_]

rather than creating a public pillory, it would be a better idea to educate content publishers (me included) to use watermarks on everything.
because artists are easier to reach via artist channels, than clients.
how would a client know about a blacklist website?
and i'm against "hate sites". defaming people in public is something better to avoid, unless you are looking for court battles.

[DaForce]

great idea... but would be tough to implement without getting your self in trouble for defamation..etc...etc...

But I agree something certainly needs to be done.

[gilpo]

As a former journalist, I had to take classes on things like this. The only thing you have to worry about is being sued for libel. That is, here in the USA.

Libel is something printed that is untrue and with malicious intent. It is the printed version of slander. In order to sue you and win, they have to prove 2 things.

1) that what was printed was untrue

and

2) that you did it with malicious intent

Number 2 is very hard to prove and is usually why these cases get dismissed. It is very hard to prove that a person knew the information was false and printed it anyway just to be mean.

So, if you could post a screen shot of the offending web site proving the copyright violation and post an equivalent of an affidavit from the person that actually made the image, you would be covered. Even if you turned out to be wrong, you have evidence that you tried to the best of your ability to make sure the facts were right. Therefore, number 2 doesn't apply and you wont be quilty of libel.

Now, you also have to consider that just because you are innocent, you can still be sued and that can cost you $$$$ in defence.

[plastic_]

Now, you also have to consider that just because you are innocent, you can still be sued and that can cost you $$$$ in defence.

exactly...just because the right is [supposed to be] on your side, that doesn't mean you are safe from being raped in court. i've seen it often enough, working in the construction business. the commercial laws only protect those with endurance and good, expensive lawyers.