Wilson Whitaker Rynell

Experienced Lawyers

info@wwrlegal.com

a blue and orange check mark with the letter w on it as the Wilson Whitaker Rynell Logo
972-248-8080 DALLAS
713-830-2207 HOUSTON
512-691-4100 AUSTIN
wilson whitaker rynell attorneys and counselors at law logo
972-248-8080 DALLAS
713-830-2207 HOUSTON
512-691-4100 AUSTIN

Houston Copyright Infringement Attorneys

Let Wilson Whitaker Rynell help protect federally registered copyrighted works in court.

Houston Copyright Infringement Attorneys

Copyright infringement is the unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright holder.

Copyright Protection In The United States

Welcome to Wilson Whitaker Rynell, Houston’s premier law firm specializing in copyright infringement litigation. Our experienced team of litigators is dedicated to protecting the intellectual property rights of creators, innovators, and businesses. Whether you're an artist, writer, musician, or corporation, we provide aggressive legal representation tailored to meet your unique needs. Our firm combines deep industry knowledge with a proactive approach to ensure your creative assets are vigorously defended. Trust Wilson Whitaker Rynell to navigate the complexities of copyright law and deliver results that safeguard your work and your future. Contact us today for a consultation.

What Is Copyright Infringement?

Copyright infringement involves the unauthorized use, reproduction, distribution, performance, display, or creation of derivative works from copyrighted material without explicit permission from the copyright holder. It's essential to recognize common forms of infringement to avoid legal consequences.

a blue and orange check mark with the letter w on it for Wilson Legal Group Logo

Understanding Copyright Infringement: Key Examples and Legal Implications

Common Copyright Infringement Scenarios Include:


  • Unauthorized Reproduction: This includes copying and distributing copyrighted books, music, videos, software, and other materials without the copyright owner's permission.


  • Online and Peer-to-Peer Sharing: Sharing copyrighted files, such as movies and music, on peer-to-peer networks or through online platforms without necessary authorization. Simply attributing the creator is not enough for legal sharing.


  • Plagiarism: Appropriating someone else’s writings or creative outputs without proper attribution or permission, even if the original material is not overtly creative, is still subject to copyright protection.


  • Music Sampling and Remixing: Creating new music or multimedia that incorporates samples from copyrighted songs without securing permissions.


  • Unauthorized Use of Images: Employing copyrighted images, photographs, or illustrations in your publications, websites, or digital content without authorization can lead to infringement issues.


  • Adapting Copyrighted Works: Generating derivative works such as fan fiction, fan art, or other adaptations from copyrighted materials without the original creator’s permission.


  • Online Content Redistribution: Reposting copyrighted content on social media or other online platforms without the rights holder's consent, regardless of the platform's public nature.


  • Photocopying and Scanning: Copying or scanning copyrighted printed material like textbooks or articles without permission, outside the bounds of fair use in educational settings.


  • For individuals and organizations, understanding and respecting copyright laws is crucial to protect intellectual property and avoid potential legal actions.


  • Defenses Against Copyright Infringement

    When creating online content or launching digital campaigns, it's crucial to be vigilant about copyright laws to avoid legal complications. However, if you find yourself accused of copyright infringement, there are several defenses you might consider. Understanding these defenses can help protect your work and ensure that your use of copyrighted material falls within legal boundaries. Here is a detailed list of potential defenses against copyright infringement, each accompanied by examples to illustrate how they can be applied in practical scenarios.


    • Fair Use: This defense applies when the use of copyrighted material is limited and transformative for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. Example: A non-profit educational website uses small excerpts from a copyrighted novel in a literary analysis video. The use is transformative because it provides educational commentary and critique.

    • License or Permission: Having a license means you have permission from the copyright holder to use the material in the way specified in the agreement. Example: A blogger has obtained permission from a photographer to use their copyrighted photographs within a travel blog post. This permission could be via a direct license or through a licensing platform.

    • First Sale Doctrine: This defense allows the resale of copyrighted materials or their distribution after the initial purchase, as long as the product has been lawfully purchased. Example: A bookstore resells used copyrighted novels that it purchased from the original buyers, which is legal under the first sale doctrine.

    • De Minimis Use: This defense argues that the amount of copyrighted material used is so trivial that it does not qualify as infringement. Example: A filmmaker briefly shows a copyrighted painting in the background of a movie scene. The use is incidental and likely considered too minor to constitute infringement.

    • Innocent Infringement: This occurs when an infringer did not know, and had no reason to believe, that their actions constituted copyright infringement. Example: A new graphic designer uses a copyrighted image found on an unrestricted image sharing platform, mistakenly believing it to be free for commercial use.

    • Doctrine of Laches: This legal doctrine prevents a copyright holder from pursuing a case if they waited too long to complain about the infringement, and the delay prejudiced the defendant. Example: A musician fails to sue another artist for copyright infringement for several years, during which the second artist has built a career around the disputed work.

    • Statute of Limitations: Infringement claims must be made within a specific time period from the date of the alleged infringement. If the lawsuit is filed after this period, the defense can argue that the statute of limitations has expired. Example: An author discovers that their book was copied and sold by another publisher but only files a lawsuit five years after learning of the infringement, exceeding the statutory period.

    CLIENT MATTERS


    5,000+


    YEARS OF SERVICE

     25+

    Award Winning

    Recognized in the legal industry as dedicated board-certified lawyers and Rising Stars.

    Expert Team

    Your project will be handled by legal experts every time. You will have the most experienced attorneys working for you. 

    Quality Representation

    You’ll find the support you need to ensure that things run smoothly. We’re here to help with all your legal needs.

    Meet Our Team

    View All
    A person is holding a cell phone in front of a book titled artificial intelligence
    By John Wilson February 19, 2025
    Copyright and Translated Content: Who Owns the Creative Rights? Understanding Copyright Law and Translation Copyright law protects creative work and bestows sole authority over the work upon the creators. For example, the owner of the work of a novel has the right over the work under the concept of the right under the copyright. Courts have found that “the degree of protection afforded by the copyright is measured by what is actually copyrightable in the publication and not by the entire publication.” See, e.g., Dorsey v. Old Sur. Life Ins. Co., 98 F.2d 872, 873 (10th Cir. 1938) (emphasis added). For translations, the situation is not very clear. Translations involve creative judgments over word translation and not the translation of mere words. Hence the knowledge about the applicability of the concept of the right over the work is essential for establishing the right over the work. For example, a Court in the Northern District of California stated that: “ the determinative question is whether Plaintiff holds a valid copyright. ” Signo Trading Intern. Ltd. v. Gordon, 535 F. Supp. 362, 363 (N.D. Cal. 1981). The Signo Trading Court dismissed Plaintiff’s infringement claims because plaintiff did not have a valid copyright as a matter of law in the translations and transliterations at issue because they lacked the “requisite originality.” Id. at 365. Can Translation Be Considered a Creative Process? The Practice of Translating Translation goes beyond the replacement of one word by the equivalent word from the source text. Translating literary work, poetry, and fiction with deeper meanings beyond the surface text is a complex, artistic process. Translating books like The Iliad, for instance, requires the practice of artistic translation to translate the emotions, thoughts, and the culture correctly. Technical Translations and Legal Translations Conversely, technical writing and texts for the law need less creativity and instead value correctness over all else. These writing forms require strict adherence to the original sense, leaving very little room for artistic interpretation. Translations for these writing forms thus typically involve less creative contribution and less potential for the work being protected by copyright. Why Is Creativity Important for Translations for Copyright? Originality when translating For a work to be subject to copyright, some creativity, however slight, is essential. Even when the translation is taken from the work, the translation also includes some creative work by the translator. This creativity can make the translation subject to copyright. A derivative work must “recast, transform[], or adapt[]” a preexisting work and “consist[] of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship.” Id. In other words, it must change or alter the pre-existing work’s content and must itself be an original work of authorship. The Supreme Court stated that “ [t]he sine qua non of copyright is originality ” and that “ [t]o qualify for copyright protection, a work must be original to the author. ” Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., Inc., 499 U.S. 340, 361 (1991) at 345. “Original, as the term is used in copyright, means only that the work was independently created by the author (as opposed to copied from other works), and that it possesses at least some minimal degree of creativity.” Id. (citing 1 M. Nimmer & D. Nimmer, Copyright §§ 2.01[A], [B] (1990)). In granting a Rule 12 motion to dismiss, the Signo Trading Court held that: " It is inconceivable that anyone could copyright a single word or a commonly used short phrase, in any language. It is also inconceivable that a valid copyright could be obtained for a phonetic spelling, using standard Roman letters, of such words or phrases. Although lists of words and translations of larger works may be copyrightable, Plaintiff cannot claim credit for any of the elements which make those things copyrightable. For these reasons, Plaintiff does not hold a valid copyright on the translations or transliterations ... " Signo Trading, 535 F. Supp. at 365. The Problem of the Derivative Work However, translations are generally "derivative works" - derived from the work of another. Because of this, the owner or author of the work is generally required to agree to the translation. Translations made illegally can be held under the classification of copyright violations, even when the translator has added creative elements. Who Has the Right over the Translated Work? Employer-Commissioned Translations Ownership of the copyright for the translation work varies. If the translation is commissioned by the owner of the original work, the owner will retain the right. Even when the translator adds creativity by passing over the original emotions and thoughts, the owner will not necessarily lose the right over the translation work. In some circumstances, the translation work can be accredited by the translator without them holding the right over the work. Independent Translations If a translation is performed independently by the translator, the translator can even be identified as the co-author of the translation. Nevertheless, the author typically has the underlying copyright, restricting the translator’s right over the work. Creative Translations from the Public Domain In certain cases, a translation may be creative enough to warrant its own copyright. For example, a translator adapting a classic work or a book in the public domain into modern language may introduce enough originality to qualify for copyright protection. However, direct, word-for-word translations are typically not considered original enough to receive new copyright protection. What About Machine Translations? The Human Creativity Copyright Requirement Machine-generated translations, including those produced by platforms like OpenAI , operate through advanced algorithms that replicate language patterns rather than capture the human touch. Unlike translations crafted by human translators who often infuse cultural insight and genuine emotion into the work, OpenAI's output is rooted in statistical patterns and data. Consequently, while these translations are impressively efficient and accurate, they typically fall short of the originality required for copyright protection. This distinction underscores the human creativity requirement needed to secure a valid copyright . Ultimately, although machine-generated translations serve as powerful tools, they do not offer the same legal and creative protections as those provided by human translators. The Bottom Line: Navigating Copyright in Translations Translations occupy the middle ground under the law of the copyright. Albeit the right of the original author generally has the right under the copyright, the right under the copyright can also be claimed by the translator provided the translation is creative enough. Central considerations here include the creativity the translator has added, the nature of the work being translated, and whether the work is under the public domain. These considerations establish the right of the owner under the copyright for the translation. Why Wilson Whitaker Rynell for Your Copyright Work? At Wilson Whitaker Rynell, our professional lawyers specialize in the practice of copyright law and copyright litigation , including the complex subject matter of translation work. We can provide you with advice about the ownership of your work under the provisions of the copyright, and protect your creative property. If you are the author, the publisher, or the translator, you can rely upon the advice from our firm. Copyright Translation FAQS
    A red balloon is sticking out of a window of a blue wooden building.
    By Chelsea Lankford November 15, 2024
    How to Revive an Abandoned Trademark Application with the USPTO
    A notebook is open to a page that says do n't compare yourself to others
    By John Wilson November 5, 2024
    Navigating the Use of Third-Party Trademarks in Competitive Advertising: A Legal Guide
    Show More
    Share by: