The book Licensing Photography is heavily copyright-optimistic and written to teach photographers how to make the most money off of their photos.  Only one chapter is dedicated to online photography issues, and it is not a very thorough discussion.  It is indicative of the lack of innovation in traditional photography circles, and the lack of education regarding many new digital photography markets.  For being a “how-to” guide, it is obviously lacking some key insights in the integration to the internet and online/digital photos.  Their only discussion of the use of new technology is of an offline database for linking licensing info to a photo or group of photos.
Even though the book was written in 2006, there is no mention of Creative Commons or DIY licensing issues, even though there are commercial Creative Commons licenses.  Their insistence of holding onto traditional methods could potentially harm photographers, as Creative Commons licenses can increase online exposure.  The book is not marketed just to commercial photographers, and therefore omits the interests of a large group of people who may be looking for an education in digital photography copyright concerns.  The authors also do not take into account that artists may want to use their photos in different ways and still have them available for wide use.  The chapter discourages the use of watermarking, image recognition software and web spiders, by claiming they do not work.  While being a very copyright-optimistic book, it has a very bleak and pessimistic look at online photography issues.  They mention how vital it is to track and enforce your photos’ licenses, but there is no discussion of modern licensing models. 
There is a quote in the chapter regarding copyright infringement and how it is a “double edged sword”:  “Make sure the edge closest to the offender is the sharpest one”.  This is a troubling attitude, as there is no further discussion on sending letters to copyright infringers, cease and desists, or alternatives in internet technology – even in 2006.  For being a very recent book on photography licensing issues, it is disconcerting that there is but one chapter on the topic of the web, and basically no discussion on modern issues.  This plainly indicates the need for a greater education in the photography world of recent innovations and licensing matters. Many photographers are looking for a solution like Creative Commons, as it has the potential to balance commercial and creative interests.  It can make it easier to track your licenses, and yet also increase your business and exposure.  If more artists were aware of Creative Commons as an option, it might open their minds to the issues it addresses- like a wider public domain, and more moderation in our copyright culture.

This article, written by Kathleen Murphy in 1999, illustrates some of the copyright issues photographers faced in the early stages of the internet.  This was a time when the online legal rights for photographers and other content owners were unclear and untested.  The rights of photographers were entangled with the property rights of website creators and owners.  Piracy was a problem before digital photography came about, but hosting, storing and displaying photos online made it easier to steal them.  All of a sudden it only took a right click and “save”.  It was also a daunting task to try to catch and punish photo pirates, given the enormity and anonymity of the internet.
 Ms. Murphy describes some cutting-edge technology to track down online piracy, including digital watermarking and web “spider” services like Cyveillance.  She admits that nothing is perfect, and much of the work of catching online copyright infringement is left up to the photographers themselves.  Many photographers were not willing to spend the money on watermarking, or monthly service fees for services like Cyveillance.  It is easy to see how quickly online content owners were lulled into a sense of complacency, that it just “wasn’t worth it” to track down copyright infringers.  In 1999, the alternatives were pricy and unreliable.
 Another key issue discussed is that the contracts photographers signed when licensing their photos to a website were weighed heavily in favor of the website owner, and against the photographer.  Many of them took all rights from the photographer forever.  Those rights would then be transferred to a client, in the case of a stock photo website for example, and the photographer’s rights would be omitted yet again.  Licensing is only mentioned in this context, not in the context of the photographer creating or controlling their own licenses.
 The article seems to be geared toward photographers who sell their photos to “big business” or stock photo sites, and displays a desire for stronger copyright and better online piracy detection.  This was a time when the future of internet content and technology innovation was unsure.  Very few people had the insight to sense what the internet would become, or how important individual content owners would become; on sites like Flickr for example.  Creative Commons deals with some of these issues – it allows photographers greater control over their rights.  It allows people to dictate how their work can be used, and allows for the possibility that not all photographers want “all rights reserved”, as this article would suggest.  Using Creative Commons licensing on your photos will not stop piracy altogether, but it can go a length to prevent unintentional piracy, and make your work more accessible on the internet.  Creative Commons can help create a realm of work online that is in between the two extremes suggested by this article – complete anarchy with constant photo piracy, or strict licensing that takes and wields all of someone’s rights.