I’m going to get this out of the way first: I don’t like watermarks. I use them, but I don’t like putting them on my photos.
Oh sure, I can name all the reasons that many of us put watermarks on our photos. People can more easily find and quickly identify your photos, it makes it more difficult to steal them, and on and on.
And sure, it helps. I’ve been contacted by numerous people who found my website and contacted me about purchasing prints or publishing my work in magazines.
But there’s one more reason why photographers might watermark their images.
The most commonly overlooked reason to watermark photos
People are always quick to say, “Well, anyone who really wants to steal your photo can easily remove your watermark or crop it out. And that is absolutely true.
However, there’s a catch to that. You might say that the removal of your watermark indicates that the alleged infringer knew that this was wrong and tried to cover it up. In legal terms, removal of your watermark makes it easier to indicate willful infringement.
In other words, it’s far more challenging for the defendant to claim, “Well, I didn’t know.”
Demonstrating intent
The idea here, of course, is that demonstrating intent makes your claim for damages against the infringer stronger.
After all, it’s challenging for someone to argue that they didn’t know when they had to remove your watermark. Is this foolproof? Of course not. What is?
The defense may attempt to claim negligence. Negligence is a less culpable mental state than willful infringement, after all.
Did I mention that I don’t like watermarks?
I’m not trying to talk anyone into using watermarks. I have a love/hate relationship with them myself. I’ve sometimes gone years without putting them on, only to reverse course.
Watermarks don’t have to be obtrusive. A small subtle logo or words are sufficient. I lessen the opacity on mine so they are not as obvious. But admittedly, I could probably make them even less obtrusive, and maybe I’ll work on that.
Want to be even more sure about protecting your photos?
Copyright them at the U.S. Copyright Office. Sure, you own the copyright when you initially create your photograph. But like demonstrating willful infringement, actually having a copyright in hand helps you make a considerably more airtight case.
Here’s my disclaimer!
This is my opinion. I am not a lawyer. I am not sleeping with a lawyer. I don’t even play a lawyer on TV. I don’t know a tort from a tart.
If you feel this is interesting information, I invite you to explore the wide world of copyright infringement more.
Removal of a watermark is considered to be removal of copyright management information; it carries it’s own penalties in addition to a copyright infringement. Also note that there is no “timely registered” difference for the DMCA1998 violation.
A willful copyright infringement is also subject to higher penalties; and potentially even criminal prosecution
Note that all of this is only really applicable to USA…
Wow, thanks for that, good to know! In my opinion, the key phrase here is “willful copyright infringement”, as removal typically would appear to indicate that.
Interesting article Julie Powell. I don’t Watermark my photos but thought about it doing it because of catching someone on Instagram stealing my photos and posting them and claiming they were his/her. Tried to complain to Instagram near impossible, I gave up. Here is another angle. When in a group and you see someone you know has stolen photos and posted claiming they are his/her do you tell the Admin in the group or just let it ride and see what happens.
Thanks, Bruce, and by the way, this article was written by Ken Lee, not Julie Powell. There’s a number of reasons why one might add a watermark (or not add one, of course). Certainly reducing the likelihood of theft would be one such motivation, as is simply adding an identifying mark so people can find you. If there happens to a group where you see stolen photos, I tell the Admin in the group every time. What they do is up to them after that, but certainly as an Admin for two Facebook groups, Long Exposure Photography and Long Exposure… Read more »
Hi Ken, Here’s my “canned spiel” I use on several groups I’m in when this subject comes up (it does, OFTEN!). As you’ll see, I agree with you on all points, plus I add one more point: Aside from the copyright office, there are services that will scour the internet looking for (your / my / photographers) work (reverse image searching of sorts). I’ve been told, there are some that will even automagically send “drop dead” letters, etc. Hi Ken, Here’s my “canned spiel” I use on several groups I’m in when this subject comes up (it does, OFTEN!). As… Read more »
Thanks for your comments, Peter. Yes, there are numerous services. Some simply track them. Some offer the opportunity for follow-through. I don’t know which one might be better than the other or anything like that.