It is an infringement to do anything which the author has, under the act, the sole right to do - to produce or reproduce the work, or any substantial part of it ; or to sell or let for hire, or exhibit in public, or offer for sale, or to distribute anything which infringes copyright. It is forbidden to import into the United Kingdom copies made abroad of a copyright photograph, and the owner of the copyright on giving notice to the Commissioners of Customs or Excise secures their aid in preventing importation.
It is not an infringement (there the photographer looks at the question from the other side, not as victim, but as possible infringer) to make or publish a photograph of a work of sculpture or artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situate in a public place or building.
A drawing made on a larger scale from a photograph is an infringement. A photograph made from an engraving of a picture infringes the copyright in the original picture. A crayon drawing of the head was made from a photograph of Queen Alexandra ; this was put on another body and re-photographed ; the proprietors of the copyright of the original photograph were held entitled to an injunction restraining the infringement. Photographs of non-copyright pictures are copyright, but the photographer cannot, of course, prevent another person making an exactly similar photograph from the same original. This remark, indeed, applies to all photographs. The photograph must not be copied ; but the photographer has no exclusive right in the subject and any other photographer may, although it is a shabby thing to do, essay to obtain the same picture for himself.
Remedies. The owner of the copyright in a photograph may obtain an injunction restraining the infringement, may recover damages, an account (and payment) of profits made by the infringer, and the delivery to him of all " plates," i.e., negatives, and copies infringing his copyright. But if the defendant satisfies the court that he was ignorant of the existence of copyright and had no reasonable ground P to suspect it, he is exempt from anything but an injunction. Unless the courts are indulgent it is difficult to see how this new provision will avail a defendant. Photographs do not come into existence fortuitously ; the existence of a photographer who is the owner of the copyright ought, one would think, to be presumed. It is doubtless with the view of preventing harsh or oppressive actions on account of small injuries that the act gives to the Court an absolute discretion as to costs. A plaintiff, therefore, who, having sustained only trifling damage, refuses reasonable offers of compensation and insists on his legal rights, may not be allowed his costs and - possibly - may even be ordered to bear the defendant's.
An action in respect of infringement of copyright must be brought within three years of the infringement.
In addition to his remedies in the Civil Courts, an aggrieved author may, in some cases, appeal to the criminal law. It is an offence punishable on summary conviction knowingly to make for sale or hire any infringing copy of a copyright work, or to sell or let for hire, or expose or offer for sale or hire, or to distribute, infringing copies, or by way of trade to exhibit them in public, or to import such copies into the United Kingdom. The penalty is a fine of 40s. for every copy, not exceeding £50 in respect of the same transaction, and on a second offence imprisonment for not more than two months. The offence must be " knowingly " committed ; and the burden of showing guilty knowledge is on the prosecutor.