Copyrighted images and the designer

Question

I had a client recently who wanted me to use some line
drawings she gave to
me for her website. The drawings were provided as scans, and
when enlarged,
it was obvious that the drawings were scanned from a book or
magazine. She
claimed she did not know the origin of the scans. I told her
that is
copyrighted material, and she can get in big trouble for
using them. My question is this: what if I
had not noticed the drawings were copyrighted and put them on
the site? Does
anyone know what a designer's liability is in such a
situation?

Answer 1

PeteC wrote:
> il doctore wrote:
>> I had a client recently who wanted me to use some
line drawings she
>> gave to me for her website. The drawings were
provided as scans, and
>> when enlarged, it was obvious that the drawings were
scanned from a
>> book or magazine. She claimed she did not know the
origin of the
>> scans. I told her that is copyrighted material, and
she can get in
>> big trouble for using them. My question is this:
what if I
>> had not noticed the drawings were copyrighted and
put them on the
>> site? Does anyone know what a designer's liability
is in such a
>> situation?
>
> The simpler way to handle it is to avoid it by having a
clause in your
> contract, similar to Triplets answer. You can't possibly
track the
> authenticity and copyright situation of every piece of
material that the
> client provides to you, and vice versa; you should
concentrate on getting
> copyright clearance on any material you provide to the
client for their
> site. In this particular situation, Fair Use would not
come into play as she
> cannot give you the origin of the scans, so the source
cannot be
> acknowledged.
>
> I suppose you can look at this situation as if you were
a mechanic; if a car
> owner came with a new tyre and asked you to fit it, they
can't expect you to
> research where they got it from...
>
> Regards,
>
> Pete.
The clause in the contract is a good idea, and again, all
this may
depend on what jurisdiction you live under. In the US
plaintiffs tend
to sue everyone remotely connected with the perceived injury
in the hope
of finding the entity (or its insurer) with "deep pockets."
In the
course of defending such a claim, however unwarranted, you
can spend a
lot of money. Such a clause in your contract may tend to show
your
intent to convince your clients you are unwilling to
participate in
copyright violation, but it is not per se proof of your
innocence. An
indemnity clause **should** have the effect of throwing the
cost of
defending a lawsuit back on the client who provided you with
the
protected material in violation of the terms of your
contract; however,
that assumes the contract was properly drafted and doesn't
violate
public policy in your jurisdiction, none of the common
contract defenses
apply, you can persuade the trier of fact that the client was
at fault,
etc., etc. ad nauseam.
Better be safe than sorry, as the OP acted, is always good
advice in
such situations. And I'll bet some mechanics **do** have a
sixth sense
about the tire (tyre) that "fell off the back of a truck
(lorry)." ;-)
Bonnie in California
kroko at
pixelplum dot com
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/CTDSites.woa