In 1976 Congress passed a comprehensive copyright act that went into effect in 1978 this act is what we are governed by for the most part today. The law prohibits publishing, distribution and copying of copyrighted material.
Reverend Jim Suter of Hatewatch Hall of Shame has written an article on Sunday claiming that The Religion of Peace has unlawfully utilized copyrighted material belonging to him.
Examining the allegations made by Reverend Jim Sutter it appears dubious if his objections are real.
An image may not be copyrighted if it has no Artistic merit---a copyrighted work must be an original work of authorship, one can not copyright a phone book as there is no artistic merit to a phone book. There must be some sort of value to it however minimal for something to be copyrighted.
Copyright---The right of literary property as recognized and sanctioned by positive law, copyright protection subsists in "original work" of authorship fixed in an intangible medium. Works of authorship include: 1. literary works; 2. musical works; 3. dramatic works; 4. pantomimes and choreographic works; 5. pictorial, graphic and sculptural works; 6. motion pictures; 7. sound recordings. 17 USCA 502 et. seq.
The images that The Religion of Peace has utilized have no artistic merit and upon making a cursory check, I have been unable to find any Registration of the the images in question. Without registration, the Reverend Jim Sutter bears the burden of proving what the images utilized are worth---there no mechanism for treble damages or punitive damages without registration.
For registration to have the force of law, one has to properly fill out the registration and it must be received by the copyright office before one may claim an infringement.
Fair Use Doctrine involves a balancing process by which complex of variables determine whether other interests should override the rights of the creators. In the matter which involves the Reverend Jim Sutter, the images being utilized are not an artistic work and may have no actual value?
The Copyright Act explicitly identifies four interests: 1. the purpose and character of the use, including its commercial nature; 2. the nature of the copyrighted work; 3. the proportion that was "taken"; 4. the economic impact of the "taking." 17 USCA 107, et. seq.
Reverend Jim Sutter appears to misunderstand what is a Copyright and while he is screaming foul at the top of his lungs and claiming to have suffered some damages, it appears that the only person who actually has suffered any amount of harm is Glen Reinsford & The Religion of Peace.
This is not the first time that the Reverend Jim Sutter has made up allegations which he can not support, earlier this year this Minister libeled me in an article and he likewise has libeled others including the Director of Jihad Watch, Robert Spencer.
It is continually disturbing to see this pattern of behavior to continue without consequences. Reverend Jim Sutter deliberately manufactures allegations that he can not support either in law or fact and these actions can not be permitted to go unchallenged indefinitely.
