 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / UK Photography / November 2004Copyright etc
Could anyone please tell me in simple terms whether a photographer who takes a photo of a person in a public place has the copyright of the photograph and the right to publish the photograph. In this case the subject, who was one of a group engaged in an entirely innocent and legal hobby activity has objected to his photo appearing in a local magazine. > Could anyone please tell me in simple terms whether a photographer who > takes a photo of a person in a public place has the copyright of the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > entirely innocent and legal hobby activity has objected to his photo > appearing in a local magazine. Every nation has different laws on the subject. Usually it is necessary to have an authorization if the people inside are recognizable and you want to pubblish the pictures.  Signaturealfa | www.alphaphoto.net Assuming this is in the UK, no, you don't need permission to take or publish and yes, the rights belong to the photographer. If the picture doesn't defame the individual he has no legal grounds for objection that the photographer needs to worry about as far as I can see. Were he to have press photography would cease to exist. It's polite to ask, if possible, and you should try to exclude anyone who objects beforehand, as I once did, but after the fact you're safe. > > Could anyone please tell me in simple terms whether a photographer who > > takes a photo of a person in a public place has the copyright of the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > -- > alfa | www.alphaphoto.net I love the UK :D > Assuming this is in the UK, no, you don't need permission to take or publish > and yes, the rights belong to the photographer. If the picture doesn't [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > should try to exclude anyone who objects beforehand, as I once did, but > after the fact you're safe. Signaturealfa | www.alphaphoto.net > Every nation has different laws on the subject. This is a UK group, so you can take a guess at which nation's laws apply. > Usually it is necessary > to have an authorization if the people inside... Public places tend to be outdoors. SignatureRoger >Could anyone please tell me in simple terms whether a photographer who >takes a photo of a person in a public place has the copyright of the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >entirely innocent and legal hobby activity has objected to his photo >appearing in a local magazine. generally speaking a recognisable person in a photo needs to sign a release for that image to be used in most commercial places, such as a magazine (usually 'recognisable' means an easily recognisable face. the same is true for uniquely recogniseable property needing a property release. In practice there are exemptions such as 'press' which a magazine photograph may well fall into. My magazine photo's do not need releases 99% of the time. If a photograph showing you is published you can then complain to the magazine and if you can prove that it is recognisable as you and also that you have been damaged by their publication of it then you have a legal case for damages. If you are in a photograph and you suspect it will be used in a certain magazine then you could, in theory, complain to them and they MAY not print it to avoid legal problems if you were to, after publication, kick up a fuss. on the other hand they may tell you to f*** off. Regards. Mark.(AKA, Mr.Nice.) Signature___________________________________________________________ "Photography to the amateur is recreation, to the professional it is work, and hard work too, no matter how pleasurable it may be" - Edward Weston. www.markvarleyphoto.co.uk - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/markvarleyphoto ___________________________________________________________ > If you are in a photograph and you suspect it will be used in a > certain magazine then you could, in theory, complain to them and they > MAY not print it to avoid legal problems if you were to, after > publication, kick up a fuss. on the other hand they may tell you to > f*** off. Yup, that'd be my response if some moron rung up complaining about one of my photographers taking a photo and they're in the background somewhere. SignatureNeil Barker >> If you are in a photograph and you suspect it will be used in a >> certain magazine then you could, in theory, complain to them and they [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >of my photographers taking a photo and they're in the background >somewhere. with my photo's I take any and all complaints on individual merit. and I have been known to give replies in batches of 4 letters. Regards. Mark.(AKA, Mr.Nice.) Signature___________________________________________________________ "Photography to the amateur is recreation, to the professional it is work, and hard work too, no matter how pleasurable it may be" - Edward Weston. www.markvarleyphoto.co.uk - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/markvarleyphoto ___________________________________________________________ Very interesting topic guys...I 'd like to take this further..... I sold some prints of an event to the event organiser. T&C's explained that the pics were for personal use or for display in his club house only. Any other use would need to be discussed first. I have now seen these pics and other's swiped from my website gallery in a leading publication in an article he has written about the event. In fact, the web images used even have part of my copyright stamp still viewable! The article did not credit my photography. I'm very annoyed. Do I take this up with the magazine editor or the client ? I feel the editor should have been more careful. > Very interesting topic guys...I 'd like to take this further..... > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I'm very annoyed. Do I take this up with the magazine editor or the client > ? I feel the editor should have been more careful. I think in this case the Editor owes you money. and if he has already paid its up to him to get it back after paying you. That was theft and nothing to do with copyright , > That was theft and nothing to do with copyright My brain hurts. What else was the editor stealing but Coolasblu's intellectual property? He certainly hadn't stolen any prints or the original computer files. SignatureRoger Send him a bill. > Very interesting topic guys...I 'd like to take this further..... > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I'm very annoyed. Do I take this up with the magazine editor or the client ? > I feel the editor should have been more careful. > Very interesting topic guys...I 'd like to take this further..... > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I'm very annoyed. Do I take this up with the magazine editor or the client ? > I feel the editor should have been more careful. You take it up with the magazine, not the client. It is the magazine's responsibility for publishing them. SignatureNeil Barker >Very interesting topic guys...I 'd like to take this further..... > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >I'm very annoyed. Do I take this up with the magazine editor or the client ? >I feel the editor should have been more careful. Send the magazine a bill, detailing which images are yours. Regards. Mark.(AKA, Mr.Nice.) Signature___________________________________________________________ "Photography to the amateur is recreation, to the professional it is work, and hard work too, no matter how pleasurable it may be" - Edward Weston. www.markvarleyphoto.co.uk - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/markvarleyphoto ___________________________________________________________ Thanks guys for this valuable information. Being a complete newbie in this freelance game I find myself in a difficult sitiuation. I have a full-time profession which pays well enough to allow me to buy these expensive toys and try to create images which people might like to buy, and publishers would like to print. The satisfaction from people wanting my images overrides the financial reward. At the same time I do not want to give these pictures away. I originally set up a website with a gallery of my favourite photos, which had a copyright logo on them. Despite this I have had photos published without my permission now on 2 occasions. The first time was by an in house magazine which relies on free contributions from its members and what happened here was that a member wrote an article and used one of my images in it. When I saw the magazine I was dead chuffed that it printed my picture, but p*ssed off that it had been nicked! After speaking to the magazine and the member concerned, an understanding was reached. You see, I didn't want to p*ss these people off as I had hoped that one day they would be clients and the pictures concerned were my first ever 'serious' shots and I hadn't expected any interest. The second time it happened, was just taking the p*ss, hence my original post here. I have emailed the editor of the magazine in question with an invoice. How long should I wait before hassleing them ? > I have emailed the editor of the magazine in question with an invoice. > How long should I wait before hassleing them ? Assume that he has to contact the person he got the photo from and get a reply. The editor's response is likely to be immediate but the reply from whoever took your piccy...? SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines (snip) > The second time it happened, was just taking the p*ss, hence my original > post here. > > I have emailed the editor of the magazine in question with an invoice. How > long should I wait before hassleing them ? --------------- ASSUMING you are in the UK (the following does NOT apply elsewhere; especially in the US where only federal courts have jurisdiction in copyright cases) you have open to you the enforcement provisions of the UK's copyright law... [parts 99 through 105] and that includes, among other possibilities, bringing a case for damages (economic loss) in any county court (e.g. small claims courts) Infringement in the case of a business (specifically the published infringement) also constitutes a criminal offence in the UK. Journalist Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE!!!!!! So they downloaded them! The editor also said that the invoice should be redirected to the article author! My feelings: 1. The article write was incorrect and should not have said my pictures were free to use! When I originally sold him prints I said that they were for private use only and not promotion or publication. I said he could use the website pics for use on his website for free so long as he did not alter them in anyway. 2. The editor should have checked with the copyright holder that the images woucl be used first. Every image has my copyright stamp on it. Now what ? > Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that > photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > woucl be used first. Every image has my copyright stamp on it. > Now what ? Neil Barker has replied earlier about this - he is 'the man who knows' as he works in publishing.AIUI, the Editor is talking sh.t, and is liable for whatever he publishes. Send them a Recorded Delivery letter explaining your points, and enclose an invoice for the value of the pics.Depending on size and how many used, I wouldnt ask for less than £250. Alan. SignatureTo reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'. http://www.dvatc.co.uk - Off-road cycling in the North Midlands. > > Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that > > photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE! [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Neil Barker has replied earlier about this - he is 'the man who knows' as > he works in publishing. For those unaware, I work as Picture Editor of a regional daily. > AIUI, the Editor is talking sh.t, and is liable for > whatever he publishes. Yup, totally and utterly - including going to prison if it came to it, thus it is in the editor's best interests to know what's going in his newspaper.... > Send them a Recorded Delivery letter explaining your points, and enclose > an invoice for the value of the pics.Depending on size and how many used, > I wouldnt ask for less than ?250. Agreed entirely. You have them by the short and curlies - they've published them, infringing your copyright and without agreeing a price. It's now up to you to decide how much you think they're worth (without taking the piss, but ?250 isn't extortionate by any means) and then send them the invoice. After that, you take them to the small claims court and you will win. SignatureNeil Barker Neil Barker wrote :> >Agreed entirely. You have them by the short and curlies - they've >published them, infringing your copyright and without agreeing a price. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >After that, you take them to the small claims court and you will win. I have had several recent similar case. The price I quoted in each case was based on the NUJ Freelance price guide, taken from the net and locatable through Google. No bother at all, the prices were accepted, the case was won. The NUJ guide has prices for newspaper, web and magazine use and advises higher charges for infringing use. I use it as my bible in these sorts of cases and refer it in my terms of trading as "national pricing guides". I quote: Charge at least double if a photograph is used without permission. :ends That price guide was judged as perfectly fair and viable in the English Small Claims Court but in Scottish Courts it hasn't got to a Sheriff yet, in my cases, the other party paying up before that. I'd send an invoice, quote the guide to detail the charges and make damned sure I hit them for every penny I could. It's worked every time so far. Any help? SignatureAlan Mackie Owner/Manager of 197 aerial photography > Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that > photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE!!!!!! So they downloaded [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Now what ? Quite simple. You go back to him and inform him that as he published them, he is liable to pay you for them. There's no argument there - whether he might say that the person who supplied them to him is vicariously liable may be a moot point, but certainly not your problem. It's a similar situation to buying an item from a shop and then it developing a fault - the shop is liable, not the manufacturer. Therefore it is up to the magazine to reimburse you as per your invoice and it is up to them if they wish to pursue the supplying individual. Don't allow them any other way. SignatureNeil Barker The contributor's liability is quite small as he didn't publish as such. It's been done to me by a town council. I wrote it off as experience, and it hasn't happened again. If they won't cough up, it's quite easy to go to the small claims court, and they may pay up to avoid the grief. Membership of the BIPP or MPA would get you a solicitor's letter. But it's always better to stay on good terms if you can. An in-house magazine isn't going to be a big payer anyway, but if they've done it before they probably deserve to pay a stiff bill. Make your terms crystal clear; I'm not a technical expert but maybe you could insist that someone who wants to use your pictures on a site does so only by hyperlinking to your own site. You can right-click disable to discourage piracy. > > Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that > > photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE!!!!!! So they downloaded [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > -- > Neil Barker Coolasblu <noway@noway.com> observed >Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that >photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE!!!!!! So they downloaded [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >website pics for use on his website for free so long as he did not alter >them in anyway. Firstly, IANAL. If you *sold* him the prints, then it was clear that they are not *free*. Send him a reproduction bill, but see below. You may have muddied the waters by allowing free 'website' use. Is the quality of the reproduction 'website quality'? Or has he scanned the higher quality prints. >2. The editor should have checked with the copyright holder that the images >woucl be used first. Every image has my copyright stamp on it. If you can prove the editor had one of your 'originals' with your copyright stamp, insist that you be paid by the paper. Any dispute is between the contributor and the editor. >Now what ? make sure you never give verbal 'free usage' make sure your copyright stamp shows how to contact you and the message 'not to be reproduced without express permission'. My views, but IANAL. Mike [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] SignatureMichael J Davis <>< Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused the meaning of "discussion" with "digression". <>< > Coolasblu <noway@noway.com> observed > >Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > stamp shows how to contact you and the message 'not to be reproduced > without express permission'. IANAL... my undestanding is that you can't assign licences orally - copyright certainly has to be assigned in writing. How about a watermark/stamp going right across the picture, like this? http://www.uk-photo-library.co.uk/wales/wales2000/pages/11.htm This is right-click protected as well- a simple bit of Javascript. Can't remember where I found it. Can be got round, but it took me a while to figure it out, and it certainly deters casual theft. > Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that > photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE!!!!!! So they downloaded [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Now what ? > How about a watermark/stamp going right across the picture, like this? > http://www.uk-photo-library.co.uk/wales/wales2000/pages/11.htm This is > right-click protected as well- a simple bit of Javascript. Can't > remember where I found it. Can be got round, but it took me a while to > figure it out, and it certainly deters casual theft. When you say "right-click protected" do you mean against saving the graphic? I'm afraid it doesn't do any such protection here - but that's maybe because we don't use Microsoft stuff. It's one click and save. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines Doesn't work in Firefox either. Oh well. Just trying to be helpful. > > How about a watermark/stamp going right across the picture, like this? > > http://www.uk-photo-library.co.uk/wales/wales2000/pages/11.htm This is [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com > Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines > How about a watermark/stamp going right across the picture, like this? > http://www.uk-photo-library.co.uk/wales/wales2000/pages/11.htm This is > right-click protected as well- a simple bit of Javascript. Can't remember > where I found it. Can be got round, but it took me a while to figure it out, > and it certainly deters casual theft. Mark, Your javascript is completely ignored by Netscape - that's one easy way to get around it... I trust you cleared the copyright on the .js? <g> Coolasblue: Check to see if your household insurance has legal expenses cover. It might give you free access to a lawyer, also the CAB might be worth a go - although this could be too obscure for them. Good luck! Andy > > How about a watermark/stamp going right across the picture, like this? > > http://www.uk-photo-library.co.uk/wales/wales2000/pages/11.htm This is [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > easy way to get around it... I trust you cleared the copyright on the > .js? <g> Didn't get it from that site, but from a public source. I forget where, but I don't nick software, either. > Coolasblue: Check to see if your household insurance has legal expenses > cover. It might give you free access to a lawyer, also the CAB might be > worth a go - although this could be too obscure for them. Good luck! > > Andy > Didn't get it from that site, but from a public source. I forget where, but > I don't nick software, either. That was a joke. No-one's going to care about 5 lines of Java. Andy >Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that >photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE!!!!!! So they downloaded [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Now what ? repeat your position and reasons to them and send another copy of your invoice giving them 28 days to pay from the date of the first invoice you sent them, and mention legal action, small claims court is your friend. Regards. Mark.(AKA, Mr.Nice.) Signature___________________________________________________________ "Photography to the amateur is recreation, to the professional it is work, and hard work too, no matter how pleasurable it may be" - Edward Weston. www.markvarleyphoto.co.uk - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/markvarleyphoto ___________________________________________________________ Fair enough. Took it too seriously. > >Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that > >photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE!!!!!! So they downloaded [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< > -=Every Newsgroup - Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=- > Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said > that photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE!!!!!! So they > downloaded them! The editor also said that the invoice should be > redirected to the article author! > My feelings: > 1. The article write was incorrect and should not have said my pictures > were free to use! When I originally sold him prints I said that they > were for private use only and not promotion or publication. I said he > could use the website pics for use on his website for free so long as > he did not alter them in anyway. > 2. The editor should have checked with the copyright holder that the > images woucl be used first. Every image has my copyright stamp on it. > Now what ? Ask the editor for the exact words used giving him the permission. Ascertain the cost of an internal A4 page of advertising in the magazine and the payment made for the article (if any). Use the answer to the last two as a guide to how much you're going to charge the author and send him an invoice (marked "without prejudice" if you want to be vindictive) and demand an appropriate apology in the next issue of the magazine together with another (but high quality) version of the picture for which you accept payment from the magazine. But please remember that magazine editors are overworked and underpaid people who are rarely appreciated by either contributors or readers... ;-) SignatureJohn Cartmell editor Qercus - editor@qercus.com www.qercus.com Qercus: a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines one magazine for all RISC OS users Finnybank Ltd 30 Finnybank Rd Sale M33 6LR == 0161 969 9820 Thanks for all of your support here guys! WOW! I am really chuffed with all of this support. I did send him an invoice for about ?250 as per NUJ guidelines and thats what he tried to fob off to the contributor. I emailed the contributor explaining how much his faux pas has cost me, and hoping he will apologise by giving me exclusive rights to next years sporting event! I have emailed the editor again advising him that "under advice, the magazine is liable and should settle the attached invoice..." Problem is that if this turns nasty, I'm unlikely to get any future work published in this magazine am I? BUt then I guess there's no guarantee that they would publish my work anyway.... I'll keep you all in touch with what happens but the small claims court looks like it might be needed.... Cheers Ravi > Problem is that if this turns nasty, I'm unlikely to get any future work > published in this magazine am I? BUt then I guess there's no guarantee > that they would publish my work anyway.... There's always a difference between what you're entitled to do - and what it's politic to do. I did give the editor's pov for you. ;-) SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines [Coolasblu wrote in uk.rec.photo.misc] > Problem is that if this turns nasty, I'm unlikely to get any future work > published in this magazine am I? Hi, Ravi -- I think I would prefer for my work not to be published at all in this publication, than to find that time and again my work has been stolen by them. Good luck with your case, I'd be interested to hear how it pads out ! Signaturehttp://fotoserve.com/ - Prints, Slides, Posters, Mugs, T-shirts,, Calendars, Jigsaws, Tableware, Caricatures, Greetings cards, Picture bags, Photo Album and Book covers, Canvas Prints, tissues and more ..... from your own digital images. > Thanks for all of your support here guys! WOW! I am really chuffed with all > of this support. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > published in this magazine am I? BUt then I guess there's no guarantee that > they would publish my work anyway.... Maybe, maybe not - the editor tried to bluff you, but he knows he messed up and when you call his bluff unless he's a complete amateur he knows the score and won't hold against you the fact that you do too. On the other hand, maybe he's a serial copyright thief, in which case you don't want anything to do with him anway. Peter > Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that > photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE!!!!!! So they > downloaded them! The editor also said that the invoice should be > redirected to the article author! > > My feelings: (snip) > 2. The editor should have checked with the copyright holder that the > images woucl be used first. Every image has my copyright stamp on it. > > Now what ? ----------- Downloading from the web and re-publishing IS infringement - it is only one step removed from scanning from a published print source or original photo and re-publishing. Editor should know better and I suspect that he does. In addition to the civil liability to pay your invoice... Suggest you point this out to him: Main index to the 1988 Act http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880048_en_1.htm#tcon thereafter, in part http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880048_en_7.htm#mdiv107 Criminal liability for making or dealing with infringing articles, &c. OFFENCES 107.—(1) A person commits an offence who, without the licence of the copyright owner— (a) makes for sale or hire, or (b) imports into the United Kingdom otherwise than for his private and domestic use, or (c) possesses in the course of a business with a view to committing any act infringing the copyright, or (d) in the course of a business — (i) sells or lets for hire, or (ii) offers or exposes for sale or hire, or (iii) exhibits in public, or (iv) distributes, or (e) distributes otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright, an article which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe is, an infringing copy of a copyright work. --------- There is absolutely NO excuse for someone holding the position of editor (even of a Parish newsletter, I might add) without at least some knowledge of the relevant law. If he wants to play the fool you can always go to his management. As the published copy, I believe you noted, had a partial copyright notice visible he is between a rock and a hard place to deny knowledge of, or claim to having no reason to believe, the image he used was not somehow infringing ["...and which he knows or has reason to believe is, an infringing copy of a copyright work...."] Journalist Threaten the editor with a claim, using the small claims court. You must protect your copyright. Without it we all get ripped off. > > Editor replied saying that the person who submitted the article said that > > photos could be downloaded from my website for FREE!!!!!! So they [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > > Journalist > Threaten the editor with a claim, using the small claims court. You must > protect your copyright. Without it we all get ripped off. ------- You are welcome to suggest how to do that Stuart... as there is absolutely NO system built-in in the UK (unlike the US where registration is done with a government agency). AFAIK there are only limited ways, and none completely satisfactory, for filing copies of copyrighted works with "pay-for-the-service" private (and expensive) companies; and about all it really provides in probative evidence is that a particular work existed at a particular time (only IF the chain of custody is also proven) but does NOT prove copyright ownership in absolute terms because anyone could file the "registered" copies and "claim" to be the author. In this case the OP did have the image(s) marked and noted that in the repro copy a "partial" of the original marking could be seen still clinging to the published infringing work. I have actually been guiding another photographer, in another completely separate case, through the same (small claims) process on a commercial infringement of her images, specifically shot for a calendar; this rip-off was done by a pub where some of the images were shot that then (and not only without permission but expressly against the instructions of the photographer - and by removing the copyright notice from the face of the images in doing so) used them from (c) marked proofs that were supplied as a courtesy to create a commercial advertisement for themselves in the form of a poster and other infringing uses. Journalist > AFAIK there are only limited ways, and none completely satisfactory, for > filing copies of copyrighted works with "pay-for-the-service" private [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > ownership in absolute terms because anyone could file the "registered" > copies and "claim" to be the author. Personally, I'm against any system that puts the onus on the photographer to register their copyright of an image in any way. As photographers we shouldn't _have_ to do anything to show that our photographs are copyright. You've probably queered your pitch with this publication by sticking up for yourself, so there is a case to be made for suing anyway. If there's no more work coming from that source, you might as well have some money, I suppose. > > AFAIK there are only limited ways, and none completely satisfactory, for > > filing copies of copyrighted works with "pay-for-the-service" private [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > photographers we shouldn't _have_ to do anything to show that our > photographs are copyright. > You've probably queered your pitch with this publication by sticking up for > yourself, so there is a case to be made for suing anyway. If there's no more > work coming from that source, you might as well have some money, I suppose. Mark, would you please learn to respond to posts properly. What you've written makes no sense at all as a reply to my post which you've quoted below your message. Willy Eckerslyke <oss108no_spam@bangor.ac.uk> wrote in > message news:305rulF2s6g4kU1@uni-berlin.de... > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > photographers we shouldn't _have_ to do anything to show that our > > photographs are copyright. > You've probably queered your pitch with this publication by sticking up > for yourself, so there is a case to be made for suing anyway. If there's > no more work coming from that source, you might as well have some money, > I suppose. If he has then he's made a mistake. You should never burn your boats as a first option; whilst some magazines may be bitter rivals editors will doubtless take note of what happens elsewhere - especially if it's done publicly. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines Update! 1. The editor has forwarded my complaint to his predecessor and managing director. He says I am within my rights and under his leadership, this would never have happened! 2. He has agreed to publish my article and photos in the next issue. Now Jerry, my question is..... 1. I suspect he's fobbing me off so how ong should I wait.... 2. I had submitted the same article and photos to two other magazines. Am I obliged to ask them not to run the piece? Or can I leave as is. One of the mags is an in house, members only magazine which does not pay for contributions. TIA > 2. I had submitted the same article and photos to two other magazines. > Am I obliged to ask them not to run the piece? Or can I leave as is. > One of the mags is an in house, members only magazine which does not > pay for contributions. Do *not* let it go to more than one magazine without discussing it in detail with the editors in advance ie immediately. This is your equivalent of what they have done to you. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines >> 2. I had submitted the same article and photos to two other magazines. >> Am I obliged to ask them not to run the piece? Or can I leave as is. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > detail with the editors in advance ie immediately. This is your equivalent > of what they have done to you. OK - have informed the relevant editors by email. Thanks John. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.