Creators: Is It OK For You To Say “No Infringement Intended”?
"No infringement intended." Have you tried to use this?
If you're a #creator, you know how difficult it is to come up with PURELY original work on a consistent basis.
Sometimes you're tempted to borrow something you've seen elsewhere. You might add your own twist to that person's work, or you might not. You might think by adding the disclaimer "No infringement intended" protects you against being accused of plagiarism or copyright infringement.
This defense does not work. EVER.
"Intention" is not an element to proving copyright infringement. If it was, then copyrights would have no value because an infringer could always say they didn't intend to copy someone's work. It's almost impossible to prove what was in your mind when you copied someone's work. You have an obligation to be careful about infringing other people's work.
So, as a creator, what should you do?
Understand the copyright rules of the platform where you're posting your work.
Do some type of clearance search before you create, but accept that no search can be perfect.
Get a formal copyright for your work as soon as possible. There are ways to get copyrights in bulk if you have a lot of items to protect.
Talk to a professional to understand actual defenses to being accused of infringement.
Contact me for a free consultation!
#entrepreneurs #creativephotography #copyrightattorney #contentcreator #streamer #klaw
Sources:
Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp., 81 F.2d 49 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 298 U.S. 669, 56 S. Ct. 835, 80 L. Ed. 1392 (1936); Buck v. Jewell-LaSalle Realty Co., 283 U.S. 191, 198, 51 S. Ct. 410, 75 L. Ed. 971 (1930); Lipton v. Nature Co., 71 F.3d 464, 471 (2d Cir. 1995); Costello Publishing Co. v. Rotelle, 670 F.2d 1035 (D.C. Cir. 1981); Wihtol v. Crow, 309 F.2d 777 (8th Cir. 1962); Toksvig v. Bruce Publishing Co., 181 F.2d 664 (7th Cir. 1950); Home Art, Inc. v. Glensder Textile Corp., 81 F. Supp. 551 (S.D.N.Y. 1948).
