ramjarjamjar

Jurassic Park MOCs removed from Flickr for copyright infringement. Request made by Universal City Studios LLC

Recommended Posts

A couple of days ago I noticed that all of the pictures of some Jurassic Park mocs that I had made about 5 years ago had been removed because of supposed copyright infringement and that the request had been made by Universal City Studios LLC.  Haven't really been paying attention to the goings on in the Lego community for a while, in fact I haven't really even touched Lego in years. So I was wondering if these copyright related takedowns are a thing now? Do they even have grounds to make a copyright complaint?  Is the takedown request even genuinely from Universal City Studios? I still see a lot of other Jurassic Park MOCs on the site.
Has this happened to anyone else?

Here's the notice. It was sent in February but the message went to flickr mail only instead of notifying me via the email address associated with the account so I only noticed it recently. I've included a couple of pictures of the images that were removed . I deleted the original images of the MOCs from my computer a while ago but some of them are still partially visible when searched for on google images, which is why the image quality is terrible.

 

Edited by ramjarjamjar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WTF... it's not that you're making money out of selling your MOCs or their instructions, right? If that is not the case, I wonder what the reasons might be to get this pulled by Flickr. And why Flickr is so stupid to remove it.

 

Are those really the images of your MOCs? Is there no "Jurassic Park" sign anywhere on these models? If you have been using the "Jurassic Park" logo or it's designation written with the original Font, it might be totally legal to remove them, according to Yahoos Terms of Service, Point 6.6:

 

Quote

upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available any Content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights ("Rights") of any party;

Edited by Capparezza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really strange. They are your own photos of your own work. As said, unless you have copied logos, movie screen shots or something, this is not a copyright infringement!:wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats embarrasslingly petty by universal and I am really surprised they cou!d do this. Shouldn't MOCs fall under fair use? After all otherwise disney could take down every star wars MOC as well... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Fair Use might be another view to the problem... Or, the non-existing problem, then :)

Well, let's wait for OP to elaborate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had to take a guess no one from Flickr even looked at the images. The DMCA makes it so that companies like youtube, flickr, etc. are not responsible for copyright violations as long as they remove the content quickly on request. Universal makes the request and it is up to the user to affirm that the content is not violating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What...The...HECK!!!

Most illogical.

Edited by LegoMonorailFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LegoMonorailFan said:

Most illogical.

Always bow to your masters and never ever complain about or question a thing.... and do what you can to worship the God of Capitalism. You can't talk to Ferengis about logic, my green-blooded friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Capparezza said:

Always bow to your masters and never ever complain about or question a thing.... and do what you can to worship the God of Capitalism. You can't talk to Ferengis about logic, my green-blooded friend.

I really like that picture! :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Capparezza said:

WTF... it's not that you're making money out of selling your MOCs or their instructions, right? If that is not the case, I wonder what the reasons might be to get this pulled by Flickr. And why Flickr is so stupid to remove it.

 

Are those really the images of your MOCs? Is there no "Jurassic Park" sign anywhere on these models? If you have been using the "Jurassic Park" logo or it's designation written with the original Font, it might be totally legal to remove them, according to Yahoos Terms of Service, Point 6.6:

Yeah, there's no stickers of any of the logos and I've not sold the MOCs or instructions. I've seen comments asking for instructions but I kind of just uploaded the pictures of the MOCs and forgot about them, never got around to replying to any of the comments. And other than posting the MOCs here I haven't personally shared the images themselves in any other way, or done anything else to bring attention them. There is a comment asking to use it on Cuusoo and after googling my flickr username and jurassic park I found this. Don't know the site or the person who uploaded that 3d model, but that seems to be a pretty accurate recreation of the Jeep MOC. Maybe someone's used the design for something in a way that does infringe on copyright?

I think Dulsi is probably right about what's happened though. I might try and submit a counter notification and see i can get more info that way. I'm not really too bothered about them being removed, I'm more curious as to why.

Edited by ramjarjamjar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a lawyer, but I enjoy studying IP cases and it seems to me that your rights have been violated.

The work in question was your own creation. Based off of a third-party IP, yes, but not an explicit reproduction of a protected work--their IP has been sufficiently transformed into a separate piece of work which they do not own. These kinds of artistic transformations are generally allowed under fair use doctrine (which is not law, and varies from country to country, but generally covers the same kinds of work)--you made what you made for your own sake and then posted an image of it online. Additionally the image and the model from which it is derived are primarily artistic in nature (as opposed to commercial), meaning that a snapshot of it online is completely fair, and within your rights.

Now, if you were distributing the work in any way besides posting a photo online--say, selling prints of the picture, or models or digital instructions (or even giving them out)--then that becomes a commercial/distribution issue and fair use does not apply. In that situation a case could be made for infringement, depending on a lot of nuance and circumstance, and decided by a judge. However, since you never responded to peoples' request to distribute the work, that rules that out.

However, here lies the problem: in cases of IP infringement, you are found guilty until proven innocent. A judge may very well find that you have committed no crime, and that your pictures have every right to be posted online. But until a judge decides that, you cannot, because the IP holder has complained. You have two options: defer and comply, or resist and repost. This of course puts you at risk of being the target of a lawsuit against a huge ruthless corporation with deep pockets, just to hold on to a right that is already yours. At the very least, if Universal complains agan, Flickr will kick you out.

Speaking of that, Flickr/Yahoo!/Verizon for sure aren't going to back you up; that's clear in their TOS, to indemnify themselves and make sure you know that you are posting copyrighted material at your own risk (even if, as in your case, the material is in fact your own).

In this harsh world, you don't really have much of a choice unless you have money and a good lawyer.

Edit: a counter notification sounds like a good idea, you have nothing to lose that way. But I am not sure what kind of service you'll get from Yahoo's new mobile provider overlords.

Edited by rodiziorobs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put them back up - that's what I'd do. It is no business of Universal's (or any other private entity) what shape you form your Legos into. This is bizarre and flagrant overreach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's most likely because you had "Jurassic Park" in your titles, and a bot found that.

Still worrying that Flickr lets this pass without even checking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll avenge you with an MOC of Universal City crumbled to the ground and you as a minifigure driving around in a Jurassic Park Jeep laughing maniacally. Very cool how the company carved out a 415 acre unincorporated zone to avoid Los Angeles business taxes and city regulations but screw this one individual making little Lego vehicles inspired by our film that they enjoy and making exactly $0 off of said toy cars, we make four billion dollars a year so make them take it down now!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Capparezza said:

Always bow to your masters and never ever complain about or question a thing.... and do what you can to worship the God of Capitalism. You can't talk to Ferengis about logic, my green-blooded friend.

 1qug9f.jpg

Edited by LegoMonorailFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2017 at 2:42 PM, dulsi said:

If I had to take a guess no one from Flickr even looked at the images. The DMCA makes it so that companies like youtube, flickr, etc. are not responsible for copyright violations as long as they remove the content quickly on request. Universal makes the request and it is up to the user to affirm that the content is not violating.

indeed, and from the requesting side they tend to send these request in mass for many sites without much check in what they ask. For example Google often receive requests for removing from their index pages of the IMDb website!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not renaming them into Dinosaur Park, or Cretaceous Park... or Mesozoic Park? :wink: Its good for a giggle, beause people know what it means and no IP holder can complain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try naming your creations "Universal Sucks" and "I'll name my MOCs whatever I want" and "Funk Universal."

EDIT: Movie Studios and Record Labels are known for being extremely petty copyright nazis.  Angry Joe's review of Star Wars: The Force Awakens is still flagged for a copyright violation on Youtube and he just talks about the movie.  No footage or anything from the movie was used.

Edited by SerenityInFire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is of course that as a private person you cannot realistically challenge these claims.  Even if the case would be rather clear, like, I would say, here. You just can't afford the lawyers and possible court fees when you get up against such a big company. Plus such lawsuits can be quite distressful and may drag on for months or years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2017 at 6:28 PM, anothergol said:

It's most likely because you had "Jurassic Park" in your titles, and a bot found that.

Still worrying that Flickr lets this pass without even checking.

That could be it.  Jurassic Park(R) is a registered trademark of Universal Studios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2017 at 5:28 PM, anothergol said:

It's most likely because you had "Jurassic Park" in your titles, and a bot found that.

This is a likely possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cobb said:

Jurassic Parking, i wonder if that will stick..

That's a Far Side comic.

 f398b10689532ad02ae730a82de68627.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness Universal don't even look after DMCA themselves they outsource it to another company who most likely will try trash anything with a remote resemblance of a trademark for fear of missing something and loosing the (most likely) huge contract they have to maintain Universal's trademarks, a prime example is below, says it all really.

Quote

Universal Pictures finds pirated Jurassic World on own localhost, fires off a DMCA takedown

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/23/movie_studio_finds_pirated_jurassic_world_on_localhost/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.