Category: Online Service Providers

What happens when your "tech guy" disappears?

24/8/2018

What happens if your "tech guy"

stops communicating?
disappears?
unplugs for the last time - and dies suddenly?

I've been amazed over the years by the extent to which artists put their trust for the tech side of their whole online life - their website, their way of communicating online and for some major income streams from their art business - to one person - your "tech guy"

The sad truth

I was reminded of this when reading a post by Gail Sibley about 5 Lessons Learnt From The Loss Of My Tech Guy.

RECOMMENDED READING: I commend the post to those who are very dependent on A. N. Other for their online art business for an account of what can happen when it really happens - and your "tech guy" dies.

How to avoid being left in limbo

I've long been an advocate of the fact that people need to learn how to do as much as they can for themselves - just because it makes your business more robust (and less risky to tech guy disappearing) and because it costs a lot less money!

However I also recognise that as your art business builds you will need help - and that means employing experts to help you do things you need to do with your art business - including the tech side of being online. Whether it's building, maintaining and developing your website, making a video for your online classes or building a subscription based forum for your teaching online.

The thing is you ALWAYS need to remain in control if you want to be secure your art business and your art income.

That means:

YOU cannot allow another person to have total control over your website - you must manage the risks of them "falling under a bus"
YOU must ALWAYS own your own domain name - in your name - not the name of your tech guy. Otherwise the credibility that you build for that domain name is owned by him not you.
YOU must ALWAYS have access to your own website - as well as your tech guy. That means knowing ALL the relevant passwords. That means thinking very hard before building functionality for systems that he had a licence for but you don't
YOU must have access at all times to your email subscription database - otherwise you might have to build it all over again from scratch - but without being able to email them to tell them. Plus you MUST have a written agreement with your "tech guy" about the security of that data.
YOU run a major risk if your system is a one-off built by the tech. guy and not understood by anybody else. That could mean starting again from scratch if he disappears!

So if you need help to run the tech side of your art business life online think about the "what ifs"

what if he's not around any more - what do you not have access to, what parts of your online life are in jeopardy?
what if you argue and/or he holds you to ransom re. the increase in his fee. This has happened to people I know more times than I thought possible!
what if you want to move your website to another tech guy - do you have an agreement in places for how this happens - sensibly and efficiently?

Identify the risks - and manage them

IDENTIFY:

The specific RISKS of every aspect of the tech. side of your art business
The nature of the IMPACT on your art business life (time/effort) and income ($/£000) if your tech guy disappeared/was no longer available and/or no longer working for you
identify how to REDUCE YOUR RISKS and what action you need to take to reduce each specific risk eg agreements as to your access to the systems which support your business

Then TAKE ACTION to make your art business life more secure for the future.

Remember even the best of chums can fall out - or your "tech guy" can suddenly die. So even if your tech guy is the best tech guy ever, you MUST have a fail-safe plan that works in your back pocket.

0 Comments

Court Order: Zazzle to pay $460,000 for copyright infringement

20/8/2017

0 Comments

A court has determined that online stores, such as Zazzle, that manufacture products cannot enjoy the "safe harbor" benefits of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), 17 U.S.C. §512 normally made available to online service providers - to the extent that they satisfy required conditions.

This is due to the fact that Zazzle has a responsibility to control the production of merchandise for sale and ensure that it does not infringe copyright.

Below I try to tease out the key elements of the case and why the plaintiff succeeded in getting a a ruling that the plaintiff (an agent for an artist) can recover $460,000 in pecuniary damages from Zazzle.

The 'safe harbor' protection is only afforded to those who contend that they only operate as a publishing platform ONLINE. (Which is why Facebook is safe from prosecution). The notion is that an online publishing platform cannot be aware of everything posted 100% of the time.

However the protection only applies if a site immediately takes action to remove any copyright infringements as soon as it is made aware of them and has received appropriate proof of infringement. (which is why you need to serve a DMCA notice on the host if you see an image of yours online - see What to do about copyright infringement - for artists).

What's different about this court decision

What's different about this court decision is it states that when publication of images by an online platform moves into the production of tangible goods based on those images then the online service provider has the right and responsibility to protect creators from copyright infringement and hence can also become liable for any copyright infringement.

In other words in order for Zazzle to be protected by the DMCA's safe harbor provisions (relating to storing images of GYP's copyrighted paintings) - the provisions of 17 U.S. Code § 512 - Limitations on liability relating to material online required that Zazzle had to:

qualify as a service provider
lack specific or "red flag" knowledge of the infringement committed by its users; and
AND importantly for this case "does not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity, in a case in which the service provider has the right and ability to control such activity" (para C 1 (b) )

In this case, the Court decided that Zazzle did not pass the third test.
For the record, this is the Zazzle Copyright Policy. I'm guessing it might be rewritten by the lawyers in the future to pass liability for any costs awarded against Zazzle to the user - and make this explicit to every user of Zazzle.

This judgement has very considerable ramifications for:

all online service providers of "print on demand"
involved in the production of tangible goods for sale which involve uploaded images that infringe copyright.

Interestingly there is no press release about the Court Judgement on the Zazzle website and no blog post either. I'm unclear as to whether there is going to be an appeal although I understand the level of damages are likely to be contested further.

In effect, the court sets up a double standard: physical vs. digital. Zazzle is protected if users upload infringing images but not if customersdecide they want a copy of this image on a t-shirt or poster.
Court Says DMCA Safe Harbors Disappear Once Infringing Images Are Printed On Physical Items | Tech Dirt

The claim

Court Case: California US District Court case (Greg Young Publishing, Inc. v. Zazzle, Inc., 2017 WL 2729584 (C.D. Cal. May 1, 2017)
Plaintiff - Greg Young Publishing, Inc.
Defendant - Zazzle, Inc.
The Claim - In brief (as I understand it), the case involved a claim that Zazzle was jointly liable for the copyright infringement of certain images because Zazzle was:

publicly displaying images of an artist on its website that that GYP represented and that GYP had never given permission for uploading
AND that Zazzle was making tangible products from these images which were then sold
AND Zazzle enjoyed a pecuniary benefit as a result for an activity which it could control i.e. the making of products
AND that the safe harbor protection consequently did not apply.

GYPI alleges that Zazzle has publicly displayed 41 paintings by Westmoreland or Erickson on its website, and that Zazzle has created consumer products bearing these images. It asserts claims for copyright infringement and seeks injunctive relief, statutory damages (or, in the alternative, actual damages and restitution), and attorney’s fees.
Case 2:16-cv-04587-SVW-KS Document 81 Filed 05/01/17

The Judgement: Greg Young Publishing, Inc. v. Zazzle, Inc., 2017 WL 2729584 (C.D. Cal. May 1, 2017)

0 Comments

Art Business Info: NEWS

What happens when your "tech guy" disappears?

The sad truth

How to avoid being left in limbo

Identify the risks - and manage them

Court Order: Zazzle to pay $460,000 for copyright infringement

What's different about this court decision

The claim

The Judgement: Greg Young Publishing, Inc. v. Zazzle, Inc., 2017 WL 2729584 (C.D. Cal. May 1, 2017)

Art Business Info. News for Artists

Author

Archives

Categories

Art Business Info: NEWS

What happens when your "tech guy" disappears?

The sad truth​

How to avoid being left in limbo​

Identify the risks - and manage them​

Court Order: Zazzle to pay $460,000 for copyright infringement

What's different about this court decision

The claim​

The Judgement: Greg Young Publishing, Inc. v. Zazzle, Inc., 2017 WL 2729584 (C.D. Cal. May 1, 2017)​

Art Business Info. News for Artists

Author

Archives

Categories

The sad truth

How to avoid being left in limbo

Identify the risks - and manage them

The claim

The Judgement: Greg Young Publishing, Inc. v. Zazzle, Inc., 2017 WL 2729584 (C.D. Cal. May 1, 2017)