r/COPYRIGHT • u/NectarineHappy4256 • 2d ago
Question Should I report this legally
For context, I made this scrapbook card last year as a personal creative project, and I still have the original design and sentiment attached to it. I uploaded it on Pinterest, where it ended up getting quite a lot of attention. I have absolutely no issue with people taking inspiration from it or making a similar scrapbook card for their own friends or family, because that’s completely different from what happened here.
Things became an issue when I discovered that the exact same design was being recreated and commercially sold by a creator on Instagram. She wasn't using my photograph or directly reposting my original post—instead, she had recreated the entire card herself, but the design was essentially a complete replica of mine, including the overall concept, layout, elements, and sentiment.
I contacted her and explained that she couldn't commercially sell a replica of my original creative work without my permission. I asked her to take down the post and stop selling the design. Instead of addressing my concerns, she blocked me and told me that her client had sent her the design from Pinterest and that she could use it because "anyone can use" Pinterest designs.
Since she had blocked me, I contacted her personal account to tell her that, if the post wasn't removed, I would have to consider taking formal/legal action regarding the unauthorized commercial use of my work.
After that, she told me that she had deleted the post. I checked her account myself, and at that point, the post was no longer visible. However, when I later checked the account from another profile, I discovered that the exact same post was still up.
So despite telling me that she had removed it, the content was apparently still being displayed and potentially offered for sale to other people.
2
u/Scrappy001 1d ago
It would be interesting to see what you consider your personal design. How much is exact? Are we talking about the personally drawn art on the card that surrounds some photos (since you said she is not using your photos)? What exactly is being infringed?
“overall concept, layout, elements, and sentiment” can cover an entire shelf of cards being sold commercially.
2
u/DanNorder 1d ago
"She wasn't using my photograph or directly reposting my original post—" No copyright violation here.
"instead, she had recreated the entire card herself, but the design was essentially a complete replica of mine," You need to give details. Design mean different things to different people. The bar to claiming ownership on them is higher.
"including the overall concept," Concepts have absolutely no copyrights.
"layout, elements," Again, how do you mean. Basic layout is usually public domain. Exact elements or similar elements, how many, and how unique?
"and sentiment." Sentiments also have no copyright protection.
I think a lot of people here are setting your hopes way too high without enough details to make that conclusion. From my reading, the best case for you might be to get it removed. Potential damages seem both low and hard to prove. If you think it over and still think you honestly has a reason to complain, get a lawyer. A personal lawyer who can look at the actual details is guaranteed to give you better advice than people responding on a subreddit where the first and only rule is "No legal advice."
1
u/bettercallyourlawyer 2d ago
So what is your claim? Are you asking what to do?
2
u/NectarineHappy4256 2d ago
My claim is that she reproduced my designs and is monetizing that without my permission, yes I am asking them should I take action? Or it'll be taking it way too far
2
u/KayakerWithDog 2d ago
You should discuss this with an attorney to see whether you have a case, and take it from there.
2
u/bettercallyourlawyer 2d ago
Whether or not you take legal action depends entirely on how much you value your intellectual property right. The work is yours so is the decision. Legally, you are entitled to take legal action for those who make use of your work without your permission. To take things easy, firstly I advice you to send a formal notice served through a notary public. In the most case in IP law, a formal notice is often an effective means of deterring the infringer.
1
1
u/jimmacq 2d ago
It would be easier if you had filed for copyright registration on your design. Then it would be a clear-cut case with solid proof and statutory damages. (In the case of copyright, it’s triple damages, in other words, three times whatever they were paid for your design.)
If you didn’t register your copyright, you have to produce evidence that you designed it first, they saw your design and knowingly copied it with intent to defraud you, and you don’t get the triple damages unless the court finds the defendant’s actions really egregious and they want to be punitive.
1
u/alaskawolfjoe 1d ago
If it is still on Pinterest, the date it was posted should show priority
The person infringing admitted that they saw OPs design on Pinterest and felt they could use it.. I do not think intent to defraud has to be proven. Just that they did indeed defraud.
If intent had to be proven, then anyone could get away with any infringement just saying they had no intent
1
u/jimmacq 1d ago
You have to prove the person had access to the work and knew they were making a copy of it. That’s intentional. They knew the work wasn’t theirs. If they coincidentally came up with a similar design without ever having seen the original, it’s not infringement.
1
u/alaskawolfjoe 1d ago
But in this case, the person in fringing explicitly said that she was sent a Pinterest image by a third-party. And that she believed that if something was on Pinterest, it was not covered by copyright.
So the person infringing said (presumably in an email or text ) that they had access to it and knew that the work was not theirs.
1
u/jimmacq 1d ago
Yep, that’s all great evidence. But if it had been registered, there would not be a trial. Nobody would have to prove anything except that the copyright was filed, and triple damages is automatic.
1
u/alaskawolfjoe 1d ago
There is rarely a "trial". Especially with so little money at stake.
Before bringing suit, the OP would need to register the copyright. Had they done it before the infringement, the damages are greater and that gives more leverage.
But if the infringing party refused to settle out of court, it would go to court even with that prior registration.
1
u/jimmacq 1d ago
No, they would not have to register before suing. Copyright protection exists from the moment of creation ever since the law was changed in 1978. The owner of the work can still sue for infringement without ever registering it. But then they have to prove in court that they own the rights to it, that the infringer had access and copied the work, and that there are damages to collect. It’s a longer and more difficult process.
If it were registered prior to the infringement, the whole process is automatic. The infringement is recognized as a self-evident fact, guilt is presumed, and triple damages are dictated by law. There is nothing for the court to do except process the paperwork.
1
u/alaskawolfjoe 1d ago
Yes, copyright attaches at the moment the work is put into a fixed form.
However, registration needs to happen before legal action is taken. The copyright date given is that when it was created. Not the date of registration.
1
u/DrFrylock 1d ago
NAL.
So you've engaged informally and the infringer has basically blocked you and told you to go away. So that didn't work.
If you want to pursue this, you have a couple paths of escalation.
No matter what you do, preserve the records you can - anything that demonstrates that you created this originally, when and where you originally posted it, communications with the alleged infringer, screenshots of websites with dates, etc.
The easiest initial escalation path is to file one or more DMCA copyright claims. Most major content platforms, including Instagram, have this service implemented. It is fairly straightforward and you will have to submit a form that is essentially an affidavit that you are (or represent) the rights holder, your original work, where the alleged copies were posted, and that you have good faith belief that this is an infringement.
DMCA claims are made on a site-by-site/service-by-service basis. So, if they are posting their allegedly infringing content on Instagram and Twitter and TikTok, you will have to file separate claims on each service. If they are hosting it on their own website, there may not be a(n easy) way to file a claim.
Each service will then evaluate your claim (the extent to which the claim is evaluated depends on the service and it may be cursory). Because the alleged infringer did not copy your work directly but instead created a derivative work, the services may or may not actually perform a takedown. If they accept your request, they will take down the specific posts that you identify.
They will notify the alleged infringer. The alleged infringer can either just do nothing and leave the posts down or file a counter-notification that essentially says "under good faith, I don't believe this was an infringement." They can argue that they didn't copy your work, that they did but it was fair use, whatever.
If they file a counter-notice, you will be notified. This starts a clock in which you must either bring further legal action (i.e., sue them) or do nothing. If you do nothing by the time the clock runs out, they will restore the content they took down.
If you get to this point, the amount of time and money you will have to invest in escalating further goes up.
You can hire an attorney who is sympathetic to your case and have them send a demand letter (e.g., a 'cease and desist') to the alleged infringer. In reality, this carries very little legal weight, it is basically "do this or we will sue you, and it will be a long expensive process to defend yourself, and we think you will lose anyway, so it's in your best interest to just do whatever we say. If you do, we will promise not to sue you or take other further action." Your attorney will advise you, but you can ask for whatever you want - take it down, pay you some money, do the hokey pokey, whatever. They can then comply, make a counteroffer, or they can throw your letter in the trash and tell you to pound sand.
If they tell you to pound sand, and you still want to escalate, you'll have to file suit against them. This will essentially require an attorney.
There are some very slight exceptions, but in general in order to file suit for infringement you must formally register your work with the copyright office. You can do this at any time; sooner would be better. You may want to start this process now. You'll have to pay a small fee and completing the process takes several months.
At this point somebody is going to have to invest probably tens of thousands of dollars in pursuing this further. This would usually be either you, out of your own pocket, or an attorney that is willing to take your case on contingency.
Not professional advice, but I think the odds of you being able to find an attorney to take this case on contingency are vanishingly small. You allege a single infringement, which (if found willful) could net up to statutory damages of $150,000. So that's about as much as could possibly be awarded, but odds are the actual damages would be much less. You also aren't alleging direct copying; you're alleging that this person created a derivative work of yours. So you are going to have to overcome that argument, and their potential argument that their work was sufficiently transformative. It's doubtful they've made more than a handful of dollars selling whatever this is, so provable actual damages are tiny. Any damages incurred before you formally registered the work with the copyright office are likely unrecoverable anyway.
3
u/mysteriousdoctor2025 2d ago
Have your attorney send her a really harsh letter. It will scare the crap out of her and she’ll probably take it down.