Copyright Issue

A friend of mine was in the same boat, a couple of times this has happened to him.
Can't remember the exact details but his images were used to promote an event by using his images he had taken whilst covering the event the previous year. (mouthful!)
Also the local council used a some of his images in a local publication, without his permission.

He was intouch with both and through official letters he got his money and has some nice, although N****n, lenses!
(Yes, he wasted it)lol

They have used images without your permission, end of.

Hope it works out for you.

ali

I shall try to be as succint as possible:

This was my second email to said party:

I emailed your group via your contact web address a week ago regarding the matter that you had flagrantly abused my copyright on my images of **** by photocopying my images from the **** and displaying them on your website.
I see that you have not corrected this matter by removing said images, may I remind you that if someone re-uses my or other persons photos without their permission you are infringing their copyright. This is illegal. I can charge you whatever I see fit, for using my photos, I can demand you remove them and stop using my photos, or I can sue you....your choice.

This got a response within hours! with veiled threats of taking me to court for infingment of 'their' copyright of their faces, because I did not get permission to take their photos in a public place. And if I did attempt to sue them I would be laughed out of court.
Also it was demanded that I donate monies received from the pics (NONE! I only did it for a pic credit and posterity!) to a charity.

Things got very heated, but I attempted to calm the situation and educate the party my copright rights and UK law regarding photography.

ie. under UK Law there are no restrictions on taking photos in a public place or on photography of individuals, whether they are adults of minors and there is no right to privacy in a public place.

TBH, so many people are so unfamiliar with what they are at liberty to do regarding photography and it is up to us to educate them as best we can. I know not many months ago I was ignorant also, but I am learning fast.

I was informed there was an attempt to get my pernmission but not a very determined one, so, scanned newsprint images were put on their website all the same.
I was more upset with my photography being portayed in a very shoddy way more than anything, but there was no excuse for them to do what they did.

Waters have been smoothed, the terrible scanned newsprint images have been removed and as they are a group that raises money in a cultural way I have donated a few images low res to be ONLY used on their website, with link to my website for advertising, as they did emphasise how good my images were and I have now had invites for further events!

There it is, they have learnt a lesson and my experience in these matters has improved.

Then to top it all, today I discover a full page spread of my pics in full glossy colour in a Cornish monthly has been incorrectly credited to another photographer!
I GIVE UP!!!

EXASPERATED LILLY!

Lilly what a calamity that the Cornish clowns got the credit wrong and realistically there's nothing you can or they can do about it.

What a total bummer.

Mike

My issue has gladly been promptly resolved by the website owner, just received this response (edited)...

"After reading your pm, i have decided to remove the rotating banner images from the front page temporarily. Until i can find out who actually included your images on the site. When the rotating banner images comes back it will have all original content.
.......
.......
Anyway, i would just like to take this opportunity to apologise for my admins unauthorised use of your photos on this site, and hope that there are no hard feelings.

Regards,

Brian (Site Owner)"

Don't give up Lily!
Both you and the other photographer have to have this cleared up.
I'd hate to get acussed of stealing somebodies elses work (ie plagerism) by another photog, and would go to the hilt in getting a public apology from the magazine if I found out they had credited me for somebody elses work.

They owe you both an apology.
The op may be on your side.

I learned earlier on, to protect my images, by not publishing them to the web, and getting everything in writing before releasing anything that doesn't have a huge watermark on the front.
even your copyright notice on the front, shows deliberate intent if they have to crop it out.

Once you get a rep for fighting for your copyrights you'll see a drop in theft attempts.

I hope everybody on this board supports you by dropping emails to the offending parties.

Don't know how things are in the UK, but although in the US we have implicit copyright, unless you actually register the images at the Copyright Office and can show proof of registration, almost no court will hear your case. It sounds a bit better for the copyright holder in the UK than in the US.

People are up in arms about the Orphaned Works bill going through the US government but few realize it is technically already here in the US.
Amongst other articles I've read, Photoshop User TV had a couple of interesting interviews with copyright lawyers recently and it sounds nearly hopeless as an individual if someone infringes your work. Either way, it all comes down somewhat to a matter of who can afford the most in legal fees.
Although I am thinking I might spend the fee and register a DVD full of my stuff that I have anywhere out on the web. Still not much chance, but at least I would be allowed to step into a court and fight my case.

One nice thing is that you have 90 days from infringement to register your work and submit a case. But you have to be awfully vigilant to catch someone, register your work, and then submit a case within that 90 days.

The words are great, but in practice the copyright holder doesn't seem to get much protection if the offender doesn't want to agree to your plea to remove the images.

The US is a mess. The copyright situation is similar to that of patents, where you can copyright a sneeze if you are the first person to do so.

Congress is trying to encourage more patenting because the Patent Office has a specific remit to make money. Also, the lawyers are kept busy by all the resultant litigation.

Guess what is the background of many members of Congress.

G