Entering without Permission; Copyright Photos

Hello all, I'm coming out of southern West Virginia.

I recently had an individual break into a building of mine and take photographs, copyright them, and put them on the internet.

Now there weren't cameras to prove they broke in...so I'd say my evidence is weak to pursue that aspect. There was broken glass and obviously they have photos from the inside - and no documentation to prove I authorized any photos.

Nonetheless, I can't find any information on copyright law involving this situation. Yes, they took the photos and at the creation of those photos, they do own the copyright. But the issue here is that they didn't have a right to be in the building to take the photos in the first place - and therefore I argue the copyright is void.

I'm just having trouble finding the laws to support this.

Any advise?

The copyright is not void.

Period.

Proserpina, thanks for the reply.

Just to clarify, I could break into your house, snap photos, copyright them, put them online, and even sell them?

It just seems unimaginable that the copyright could actually stand after committing a crime.

kapeedmaro said:

Proserpina, thanks for the reply.

Just to clarify, I could break into your house, snap photos, copyright them, put them online, and even sell them?

It just seems unimaginable that the copyright could actually stand after committing a crime.

Click to expand...

According to what you've posted, no criminal act has occurred.

There is no conviction, correct?

kapeedmaro;2960260]

Just to clarify, I could break into your house, snap photos, copyright them, put them online, and even sell them?

Click to expand...

You do not actually copyright anything. You own the copyrights simply due to the fact they are your images. What you do at the copyright office is register your copyrights. The copyrights exist at the time of the creation of the images.

It just seems unimaginable that the copyright could actually stand after committing a crime.

Click to expand...

they have nothing to do with each other.

Proserpina said:

According to what you've posted, no criminal act has occurred.

There is no conviction, correct?

Click to expand...

No, no conviction. So basically I would need to pursue conviction and then the copyright could be void.

Even given that, the only evidence I have of the individual being in the building is the photos. I'm sure the photos would be enough for a trespassing charge if they couldn't produce evidence that they had authority to be in there..

kapeedmaro said:

No, no conviction. So basically I would need to pursue conviction and then the copyright could be void.

Click to expand...

That's not what I said, actually.

Even given that, the only evidence I have of the individual being in the building is the photos. I'm sure the photos would be enough for a trespassing charge if they couldn't produce evidence that they had authority to be in there..

Click to expand...

We're doing homework, aren't we? Okay, I'll play.

They don't have to prove that they had the authority to be there.

YOU have to prove that they didn't.

justalayman said:

You do not actually copyright anything. You own the copyrights simply due to the fact they are your images. What you do at the copyright office is register your copyrights. The copyrights exist at the time of the creation of the images.

they have nothing to do with each other.

Click to expand...

I see... I guess my thinking was that, for example, I have no right to enter your house/apt without your permission. Therefore there's no way I could legally create photos of your home's interior.

kapeedmaro said:

I see... I guess my thinking was that, for example, I have no right to enter your house/apt without your permission. Therefore there's no way I could legally create photos of your home's interior.

Click to expand...

Your thinking - though understandable (truly ) - is incorrect.

Proserpina said:

Your thinking - though understandable (truly ) - is incorrect.

Click to expand...

So my best option is to pursue criminal charges for the breaking and entering
...
and the copyright issue is a lost cause?

kapeedmaro said:

So my best option is to pursue criminal charges for the breaking and entering
...
and the copyright issue is a lost cause?

Click to expand...

Absolutely report the breaking and entering.

Yes, the copyright issue appears to be a lost cause.

The individual who took the photos owns the copyrights in the photos (as justalayman said) and can legally publish these photos as long as the photos themselves do not violate any laws (obscenity, privacy, publicity, defamation, etc).

You should report the break-in (as Proserpina advised), and the photos could potentially help identify the individual who broke into your residence. Making a connection between the two will be difficult, at best.