posted on August 19, 2002 06:07:06 PM new
I just saw an auction with a very loooooong description. At the top of the listing it says that the description is copyrighted. Is it possible to copyright your auction listing descriptions? Note that this is not talking about the item, it's talking about the written description of the item. I guess that's one way to stop other sellers from stealing your descriptions!
posted on August 19, 2002 08:02:55 PM new
I'd say they are bluffing. What are the court costs for pursuing a violator? Unless the item is a luxury yacht.
posted on August 20, 2002 08:42:28 AM new
http://pages.ebay.com/help/community/png-copyrights.html
eBay Guideline: No Copying Allowed! When you prepare your listings you generally should use only material (text, photographs, etc.) and trademarks/names that you created or own yourself or licensed from the owners.
posted on August 20, 2002 08:59:54 AM new
Who is to say that if I am selling the same exact item, I didn't come up with almost the same words. Just change a few words. However, if the plot and characters are the same, then it is a copyright violation. But not a twist of a phrase or series of descritive words.
For example,what if it is described as a flow blue pottery plate with a chip in the outer edge. Does that mean you cannot describe your flow blue pottery plate with a chip in the outer edge as such?
I'll bet that "copyrighted" description used a lot of copyrighted phrases and names from other companies. If it is a Ford car, I'll bet he used Ford in the description.
.
Someone here needs to be spanked.....
[ edited by mlecher on Aug 20, 2002 09:05 AM ]
posted on August 20, 2002 09:06:10 AM new
According to copyright law, you cannot copyright a description. Look:
"The sky outside is a deep blue, with fluffy white clouds floating around."
(C)2002 replaymedia
There. Now anytime anyone mentions that the sky is blue or that clouds are fluffy they owe me a nickel. Silly huh?
Nevertheless, I too include a copyright on my auctions. I don't care if someone copies my text descriptions, as I sell fairly common generic stuff like videotapes.
HOWEVER, I do want my Terms Of Sale copyrighted, and I don't want anyone copying the "Look" of my auctions. It's simpler to claim copyright over the whole listing.
It's also a grey area concerning where stealing pictures is illegal. Take the example of bookselling- If you scan/photograph the cover of a book, who owns that image, you or the publishing company? Haven't you just copied the cover artwork of the book, and isn't that illegal? This is why product placement law is such a big deal in movies.
Generally no one cares if you show a photo of a product you are selling, but you do NOT own the image.
posted on August 20, 2002 09:09:22 AM new
I don't pretend to have all the details (though they are probably easy enough to research), but I can tell you a little bit about copyrights and how they work.
About 10-12 years ago, US copyright laws were revised - seems to me that it was the first time in a hundred years or so, but not positive about that either.
The way they read now, the author of an original work owns a copyright on that work as soon as it is written; he may or may not register such work with the US copyright office. Registering his copyright makes his ownership more easily validated - but even if he did not register it, he still owns the copyright, although he might have a problem proving ownership of an unregistered work.
Clear as mud so far?
The question is actually, does an auction description qualify as 'work' under the copyright laws? I would guess that it does - even sales catalogs are copyrighted. So the writer of the auction description is probably within his rights by claiming a copyright.
As far as it being a bluff: I doubt that he has any intention of pursuing the matter in a court of law. But eBay is notoriously gun-shy of copyright infringement. Therefore, if the writer exercises his right to claim a copyright, and someone else copies the description (and it sounds like the writer has had problems before), all the owner of the original work has to do is mail the original and the copycat to eBay, with a note that it is an infringement on copyrighted material, and eBay will kill the copycat auction in half a heartbeat.
This is how it looks to me, but I don't guarantee that I am correct.
posted on August 20, 2002 10:14:47 AM newReplaymedia, you must have posted while I was writing.
If your description was part of a larger work which was copyrighted (for instance, a book, a poem, or a song), then it would be copyrighted too. Could you successfully sue someone who described the sky in the same way? Probably not. For one thing, a violation of copyright has to be provable, and there has to be enough of an infringement to rule out 'coincidence'; I believe "intent" is also a factor in determining copyright infringement. Perhaps some of our lawyer friends on this board can clarify this.
Interestingly enough, you can't copyright a title (unless that has changed).
Places like Sotheby's and Christy's (do or did) publish catalogs for their upcoming auctions, and I would hazard a guess that the catalogs are/were copyrighted in their entirety - including descriptions and pictures.
posted on August 20, 2002 10:22:57 AM new
There are aspects of an item description that may be copyrighted. But there has to be some amount of originality and creativity, no matter how small, to be copyrighted. The html may be copyrighted in the original and creative manner/combination it was used, just as software code is copyrighted.
Phrases can not be copyrighted, but they can be trademarked, servicemarked etc..
A phonebook (the listings, not the other matter) has been found not to be eligible for copyright. A compilation of "facts" can not be copyrighted unless the compilation is somehow original and creative.
Originality and creativity are the hallmarks of copyright, not how much "work" someone puts into an object. In fact, the courts don't care how much "work" went into the object, if it's not in the smallest degree original and creative, it's not protected.
In any event, copyright protection is usually a "self help" matter- the owner of the work must protect the item themselves. If you don't have the resources to go to court, there isn't a lot you can do - but if you register the work, you are eligible to recover legal fees etc.. The govt sometimes will launch criminal charges, but it usually needs to be a huge revenue loss for the holder before they will act.
posted on August 20, 2002 11:45:54 AM new
Your auction descriptions ARE copyrighted (as far as ebay is concerned). I put the copyright symbol after every one of my auction descriptions. I research all my items, and this research is for my benefit, not another seller's. I had another seller that was cut and pasting my descriptions into his auctions. All ebay requires is proof that the other seller copied. (An ebay item number that proves you had the description before they did).Every one of that sellers auctions with my descriptions, was pulled by ebay. The reason they give is copyright infringement. Although it didn't really help, as I have turned him in 4 times for stealing my descriptions (as well as my images), and he just waits a little while, and does it again. It's frustrating, but ebay seems to just pull the plug on the auctions when they are reported, but won't suspend them. It's kind of like shoveling crap against the tide.
[ edited by mipakaco on Aug 20, 2002 11:47 AM ]
[ edited by mipakaco on Aug 20, 2002 11:48 AM ]
posted on August 20, 2002 12:16:12 PM new
Reamond- One of my favorite companies to buy from in the past was this mail order company called DAK (Pre-internet). This guy would make a catalog of 40-50 electonic items and he would go on for up to 2-3 PAGES of descriptions and reviews of the product. What his family and coworkers thought, things you could do with it, etc. Very informative and original. I would read the catalog from start to end just because it was so entertaining. THIS would be copyrightable, simply because of the high amount of creativity and original text- more of a review than simply description.
To state "This VHS tape of the Movie Terminator 2, stars Arnold Schwarzenegger, and is (c)1995 New line home cinema and is NEW in the shrink wrap" would be VERY debatable. Although I wrote it myself, there isn't anything there you can't find on the box itself.
mipakaco- Just because eBay has rules, that doesn't make it LAW. Yes, eBay may pull ads when they catch people plagarizing each other's ads. That does NOT mean it's against copyright law.
sn0bbish- Have you ever noticed that when you go to a restaurant on someones birthday what do they sing? It's usually something weird "Happy happy happy birthday birthday..." with lots of clapping. It's not the "Happy Birthday to you" song in most cases. Why? Like you said, it's copyright infringement. If you sing it to your kids at home, no one cares, but in a commericial establishment, you can't do it. Blame the lawyers.
posted on August 20, 2002 06:05:28 PM new
"Research" couldn't be copyrighted if it is just information gleaned from other people's work, unless it is somehow used or compiled in a creative or original way. In fact, if you're cutting and pasting informative opinions from someone else in your "research", you may be infringing on someone else's copyright. I saw an eBay auction for a music CD that actually had my review of the CD in its description that was lifted from Amazon.com- kinda flattering.
You're right replaymedia- many think eBay's TOS are "law", when in fact they are only eBay rules, some of which may actually be in conflict with the "law". The other one that gets me is that a "bid is a contract" - oh yeah ? Says who ? Under the current operations of eBay auctions, the only thing a bid could be called is an offer, nothing more.
posted on August 20, 2002 07:42:04 PM new
A "contract" is a legal term of art. A contract must have certain elements. One of those elements is that the parties are mutually bound to perform. In the online auction scenario, a seller is not bound to do anything when a bid is placed. A seller can cancel any or all bids or cancel the auction, and in either event, the seller doesn't have to honor any bids.
Bids, or more accurately stated, "offers" can be rejected by the seller or be withdrawn by the bidder at any time up to acceptance.
The alternative view could be that the seller is actually making an offer to sell when the item is placed up for auction and the bid might be construed as an acceptance. But this can not be the case since a seller can cancel an auction and not honor any of the bids, or can just cancel some or all of the bids.
A bid is just an offer. It would appear that acceptance of the offer by the seller would have to occur at some point after the auction has closed. It could be argued that the auction closing without cancellation(s) may act as acceptance by the seller of the bidders offer.
posted on August 20, 2002 08:05:25 PM new
Just to clarify a point here:
Yes, "Happy Birthday to You" (if that is the correct title) is a copyrighted work. (A couple of sisters wrote it, but I've forgotten when.)
However, when you sing it to your child at his birthday party, you aren't doing anything wrong.
When a movie or TV show incorporates it, they pay for the privilege. It is illegal to use a copyrighted work commercially without paying the copyright holder. So sing all you want!
Until the revisions of the copyright laws that I have already mentioned, a copyright was good for 27 years, and could be renewed for another 27 years, after which it became 'public domain'. (If it wasn't renewed, it became PD after 27 years.)
Now a copyright is good for the "life of the author, plus 75 years", if I'm remembering right. (If not, I'm sure someone will be along to correct me shortly.)
One other thought: Singing in a commercial establishment, and performing for pay aren't quite the same thing. To illustrate, if you and your family sing 'Happy Birthday' to your child at McDonald's, that isn't considered a public performance. However, if your wife/husband requests the singer at a nightclub to sing it for you, then it is subject to licensing laws.
posted on August 20, 2002 08:24:29 PM new
Copyright used to be a two stage deal with a renewal. I forgit how long it was good for with both stages, but I think it was 70+ years with renewal.
At one time it was also required to register and deposit the work and display the copyright symbol. The first films actually had each frame printed on a piece of paper and all of them deposited.
In any event, the current state of copyright term is far beyond what it was meant to do. Thank the Disney corp for the life plus 75 years term. Disney was sweating Mickey and Donald becomming public domain in 2005 and 2007 and lobbied Congress for the extended terms. I think Walt died in the 1960s, so the copyrights are good until at least 2040.
Just think, many copyrights will be in force for 150 or more years. And Disney was notorious for using public domain storylines for their animations.
The axiom used to be for the creator to have a limited period of time for exclusive rights so as to profit from the endeavor and then the public had the rights to the work. Under the new term the creator, his children, and his grandchildren have the exclusive rights and the public be damned.
These ridiculous and I think unconstitutional copyright terms are one reason I don't get too upset about P2P file sharing.
[ edited by mlecher on Aug 20, 2002 09:05 AM ]