Though none of these services are replacements for an official registration with the U.S. Copyright Office, which comes with it certain legal benefits in the U.S. they can provide a way to prove exactly when a work was created and who did so. This can prevent others from laying claim to it later.

However, the stiff competition has not stopped others from trying to find a niche within it. One service, DepotCode (Note: This link is to the beta page, going to depotcode.com will not work), hopes to break into the field with a new set of features and an easier-to-use interface that may be better for the casual user.

But does DepotCode hold up? I decided to give it a shot and see what I found.

What is DepotCode

The idea behind DepotCode is similar to other non-repudiation services. The user uploads a file and that file is registered on DepotCode’s servers. DepotCode then records the date, time and a hash of the file and then creates a page where others can then verify the work as long as the registration is active.

Unlike it’s competitors, registration is not required to use DepotCode, you simply click the button to sign your document, fill out your name, company and email information and then upload your document. DepotCode can accept text, images, PDFs and various programming/formatting languages, including Javascript, Ruby, PHP, Java, C#, HTML, XML, and CSS. Other documents can be signed but the signature will not appear on the document.

DepotCode’s most unique feature is that it automatically adds a QR code to PDFs and images that are uploaded. See below for an example (see note below):

The idea being that, if you want to share the image or the PDF, you simply send the one marked with the code (it’s marked on every page of a PDF) instead of a plain one. That way, others who get it can verify who owns/created it.

A free DepotCode registration lasts one week through a paid registration costs $ 3.49 (increasing to $6.99 after the beta period) and holds the registration for two years.

So should you be using DepotCode to protection your work? The answer depends on your situation and what you’re wanting to use it for.

The Good and Bad of DepotCode

On the surface, there’s a great deal to like about DepotCode. The ability to add QR codes to documents is interesting and, with QR codes readers becoming more common place, it might be a good idea for protecting content moving forward.

Also, the lack of a registration requirement is great for those who just want to register a file very quickly. It makes it easy to jump in and get started without worrying about setting up an account.

However, that lack of registration is also a bit of a hindrance. The beta version doesn’t have the ability to set up an account. So, every time you want to register something, you have to enter the same information over and over again. Other services make it easier to register works in bulk by storing that information.

Likewise, even the price is a bit odd. Other services provide free accounts with registrations that don’t expire (many free Numly registrations are still valid after five years or more), however, even a paid registration will expire after two years. While most works won’t need this kind of protection after two years, especially with the statute of limitations for copyright infringement being what it is, there are situations where a paid registration could expire before the dispute surfaces.

Finally, though the QR code feature is useful and interesting, other services offer it as well. Safe Creative offers a series of barcodes for each of its registrations, including QR codes and has done so for years. Numly has offered barcodes on all of its registrations for over five years now.

In short, the features that make DepotCode unique are that it applies the QR codes automatically, that it is designed to work with programming code and that there is no registration requirement. While certainly an interesting set of features, it may not be enough to overcome its bizarre pricing structure and the difficulties in registering large numbers of works.

Bottom Line

All of this begs the question of who is DepotCode for? Clearly the pricing and lack of registration makes it inappropriate for casual use. Services like Safe Creative and Myows are much better for bloggers who want to register all of their posts or photographers that want to upload every image they take.

The structure, right now, is best suited for anyone who wants to register just one or two things and would benefit from having the QR code placed directly on it. An author, for example, registering a PDF before sending it to potential publishers, might want to register through DepotCode as it could be worth a few dollars to save the time of applying the QR code themselves. The same could be true for programmers turning in a big project.

Outside of that though, the other systems out there are simply cheaper and offer less friction to registering large numbers of works. The QR code feature is interesting, but similar features never took off so it will probably remain a niche product, at least for the time being.

All in all, most people will benefit more from other services, but that could change if the use of QR codes for this purpose catches on and others fail to replicate the feature successfully.

The odds of that, unfortunately, are very slim.

Disclosure: I have done paid consulting for both Safe Creative and Myows.

Note: All of the registrations for this review were done using the free version, meaning the QR codes will cease to work in one week.

covered a new startup in the copyright verification field

However, Myows is far from the only service that that is providing instant, unofficial verification of ownership of created works. The non-repudiation field has exploded in recent years. Gone are the days of expensive registries that rivaled the Copyright Office in price (while still being unofficial in nature) as now we have fast, cheap, services that offer to preserve your work and your claim on it.

But even there these services have grown, no longer merely providing a certificate of ownership, but branching out to provide help with licensing and even with infringement resolution.

So which service should you use? It’s a tough question that depends heavily upon what your specific needs and wants are. To help make the process a little bit easier, I’ve created a chart, which I’ve embedded and linked to below, to help you decide which of the services are right for you.

The Companies

Specifically, I decided to compare the services provided by five different sites. Myows, SafeCreative, Numly, MyFreeCopyright and Registered Commons. They are five of the biggest and best-known services in this field and all have been covered on this site in the past.

A notable omission is C-Registry.us, which is more of an orphan works protection service than a non-repudiation one, though it has some functionality as such. Also, since C-Registry is targeted almost entirely at artists and photographers, making it much less useful to bloggers and other types of creators.

However, if you are a visual artist, it is likely a service that is well worth looking into, especially if you sell stock photos.

I then took a look at the companies based up on some of the most popular and requested features. The results are embedded below.

The Chart

Click for Full Size

Link to Google Doc

*Extension is out of date.

Definitions

Very quickly, I want to clarify the meaning of the elements in the chart and what they mean.

1. Cost: The cost of the service.
2. Types of Work: The kinds of files/content that can be uploaded. If a service allows “files” there is no separation between different content types.
3. Works Fingerprinted: Refers to creating a hash of a file that can be compared against later. This is often how works are verified or identified at a later date. It does not involve any visual mark on the work (watermarking) or additional tag. It’s just a unique hash of the file or work’s content that will match other copies of the work.
4. Works Stored: Are the works themselves stored on the service for backup and/or later viewing.
5. Certificate Provided: Whether or not the service provides a printable certificate for easy verification.
6. Barcode Provided: Refers to a machine-readable barcode, commonly used on physical objects.
7. Public Verification: Refers to the ability of someone unsure of the ownership of a work to submit a copy of it (or other known information about it) and see who owns or created the work.
8. Custom License/License to Individuals: A custom license is your ability to draft your own license or set new restrictions on use. The ability to license to individuals is the ability to give a person or company a license to use the work and track that license in the system.
9. Creative Commons Compatible: Whether or not users can select CC licenses.
10. Contact Author: A means to contact the author within the system, not just a profile used by the author.
11. Detection/Resolution Assistance: A Means to detect copies of the work and assistance in bringing about a resolution.
12. API Available: A means for programmers and other service providers to interact with the service, including submitting works. Some may be in private beta at this time.
13. Firefox/WordPress Extensions: Add-ons for the Firefox browser and WordPress blogging platform.
14. RSS Integration: The ability to read content from a site’s RSS and automatically register it, very useful for bloggers.

Beyond the Chart

Though the chart does an overall decent job at comparing the various features to one another, there are a few things that aren’t displayed on the chart that are worth mentioning.

1. Myows is a clear winner on the ease-of-use front, having designed a system that is both attractive and easy to use. Great for those who aren’t familiar with these kinds of services.
2. Safe Creative has a robust API and, through it, has partnered with music sharing site Jamendo to protect the works uploaded to the site.
3. Registered Commons is extremely difficult to use and is targeted mostly at creators of larger, more involved works, as the pricing strategy indicates. It also has a very powerful system for verifying author identities to provide further proof of ownership.

In the end, all of the services have their separate strengths and weaknesses. Myows, for example, is the only service to provide resolution assistance and has great handling of licenses. However, there is no public verification of works. Safe Creative is extremely feature-rich, having at least some capability on all fronts but can be confusing and intimidating to use.

Numly, on the other hand, focuses on speed and simplicity though some of its best features, its extensions, are dated and it does cost money to use it with an account large enough for most creators. MyFreeCopyright is the only one with RSS integration, which makes it invaluable for bloggers, but only has minimal licensing features and doesn’t provide certificates for content other than Web-based ones.

Finally, Registered Commons has a very robust hashing system and very powerful user identification service but all of it comes at a high cost and with a very difficult interface.

All in all, it seems every service has a great deal to offer users and a great deal to learn from others.

Bottom Line

So it all comes back to the question of which service should you use. The answer is obvious: It depends.

From where I’m sitting, both Myows and Safe Creative are clear leaders in this field. Myows is well-aimed at novices and those interested in copyright enforcement where Safe Creative is more aimed at veteran users and those who need public verification and in battling the orphan works problem.

However, I use MyFreeCopyright on this site due to its RSS integration (no reason not to) and have used Numly in the past through its WordPress plugin. Finally, Registered Commons would likely be best used by those creating works that may be considered valuable financially as their identity verification program and strong hashing may provide greater security, but at a price that isn’t practical for most.

On that front though, I am interested in your thoughts. Which do you think is the best and why?

Disclosure: Chris Matthieu, the owner of Numly, is a long-time friend and former co-host of the Copyright 2.0 Show.

In short, this is a video that goes over some of the basic functionality of the Myows system, how to use it and what its designed to do. It’s about 12 minutes long though I am going to prepare a truncated version for YouTube (under ten minutes).

If you’re curious about Myows or recently signed up, this should give you a pretty good primer on how it works and some of the major features of the system.

On a related note, I’m hoping to make this video part of a lengthy screencast series on copyright issues, perhaps a video every 1-2 weeks, if the interest is there. I would appreciate your thoughts on that and how to improve future videos.

Disclosure: Chris Matthieu, the founder of Numly, which is a competitor of Myows, is a former co-host of the Copyright 2.0 Show with me. Also, I am using my referral code for Myows in this article though there are no rewards for doing so. This is mainly for tracking purposes.