Tag Archives: copyright

Who Owns A Photo?

The Copyright Of A Photograph

Copyright Symbol Textured

The folks at Clifton Cameras have put together a very neat graphic explaining much about ownership of the image.

The only thing I would add is that adding a watermark (use Marksta on an iPhone or software such as Adobe Lightroom or Photoshop on your Mac or PC) is essential when you post images online on services like FaceBook and Instagram which as their T&Cs state, have full rights to use the posted images as they see fit. You need to protect not only your copyright but also the subjects in your images from having their likeness used to promote services they wouldn’t be happy with. Watermarking also protects you against companies which may steal your image for commercial gain, try and Photoshop out your watermark and then plead ignorance. Image forensics can easily show tampering and with this you prove intent, followed by a nice payout.

When hosting your own website of photography, it’s wise not to post images full size; these are easily stolen and can be used in a variety of ways as the size allows printing and so on. Using the services of Pixelrights as your host means that you benefit from all the various anti-theft features they have as well as future plans for their new partnership with ImageRights. Highly recommended.

Shaun Curry, Co-founder & CEO of Pixelrights adds; “ImageRights International is honored to announce a new and exciting partnership with Pixelrights. This groundbreaking partnership will provide post infringement, image tracking & USCO registration included in the price of your Pixelrights subscription.
Pixelrights are the only portfolio service focused on championing copyright awareness by use of their patent pending ‘Smart Frame’ image technology
This new image format provides their members with substantial customisable technical protection, blocking illicit web-bots, stopping unwanted hot linking, disabling right click , blocking some screen grab attempts, save-as, and eliminating the image from the source file and web page.
With ImageRights technology included if anyone removes any technical protection measures from your Pixelrights site and publishes it on the web, ImageRights will track your image down, and provide a global network of IP
lawyers to take action on your behalf. Never before has a portfolio website been so safe yet so easy to use!”.

Remember, copyright is your right. You are the author and the image is yours. When getting commissioned to take pictures, you aren’t being paid for the copyright, but are being commissioned to make the photograph and granting the client a right to use the image; you’re licensing them image usage. Without your copyright you can’t even legally post your picture on your website, enter it in a competition or have a print in your portfolio. You will lose all sales and recognition as the image becomes of historical value in the future. Don’t be bullied; don’t let multi-million pound companies take advantage of your work and force you into signing away your rights.

Click to enlarge the graphic:

Who Owns A Photo

Is The UK Government Trying To Kill Off Photographers

New Act Makes It Legal for Photographs to Get Used Without Payment to Their Authors

Copyright Symbol Textured

Yes, you did read that correctly. I’m in a state of disbelief and utter disgust with our Government. Appalling behaviour. Before I continue, it’s imperative to understand that my post not only applies to professional photographers whose livelihood just got taken away by this Act, but also amateur photographers too. Also, this applies to photographs worldwide; any photographer, from anywhere can be affected by this.

Firstly, by taking a picture (any picture, be it a family snap or an amazing news picture, wedding picture, landscape etc) you create it and have copyright and ownership of that image. This is the law and a human right.

In a nutshell, the new Act (Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act, which received Royal Assent) that got voted through by government allows all work considered to be an orphan work to get used for free. Orphan works are those works whose creator cannot be found. One could immediately jump to the conclusion that this means purely photographers (this applies to more than photography, and to creatives as a whole) who have died and are uncontactable. It does not just mean this. It means any work. Consider for a moment that the billions of images that get uploaded to various websites, on the whole, have their metadata stripped out. IPTC and metadata is something most enthusiast photographers bother with (you should!) but the majority of photographers, especially those in the editorial markets, always fill in full IPTC which show’s the author of the image, copyright, contact details and so on. Well, the majority of websites, social networks and so on strip out ALL of this data. Your work, even something you shot a minute ago and uploaded, just became an orphan work. As such, it can now be used for free and for whatever purpose the thief of the image wants to use if for.

The corporation or individual stealing your work has to show that they diligently searched for you, the author, before just taking your work and using it for their purpose, often commercially, so making them money from your work, for which you will not see a penny. Well, I guess it’s easy to say I looked but the billions of images online meant I couldn’t find the author. Also the wording is so loose and legally ambiguous that it’s left to interpretations.

Although this Act still has to get made into actual legislation, no Act has been voted down since 1979, so it’s considered a formality. This is happening. The first steps have been taken and the wording is paving way for the legislation to follow. This is extremely worrying and nobody who uploads photographs to the internet can afford to be complacent.

For those who don’t know, a professional photographer’s income also comes from licensing of images. For some, this is the majority of their income. It is our livelihood. The government just took that away. For some, this could well mean bankruptcy and unemployment. Why would a government elected to serve it’s people take away their right to work and make a living? This is beyond me. How can this be considered serving the people? The photographer get’s abused, their rights to their own creations taken away, just so corporations (multi billion pound behemoths in most cases) can save a very small fraction of their costs by getting their photography, for commercial use, for free. Also keep in mind the rights of your subjects being abused.

I’m utterly disgusted.

What To Do?

I suggest anyone (amateur or professional) who uploads pictures to the internet (Facebook, Twitter and so on) immediately learns how to watermark their pictures. Watermarking means putting text and / or a logo onto your pictures to say who they belong to, before uploading the images. It’s easy to do and only takes seconds. For my main photography I use Aperture (and have presets with my logos made up – very simple) and for my iPhone photography I use Marksta (very simple to use and an excellent piece of software). Lightroom, Photoshop and so on can be used for watermarking. There are also apps for Android phones and so on. Spend a few minutes and Google how to do this. Safeguard your work.

A watermark, comprising of a logo graphic file (bottom left) and a test (central) applied using the iPhone Marksta App. Photo: ©Edmond Terakopian

A watermark, comprising of a logo graphic file (bottom left) and a text (central) applied using the iPhone Marksta App. Photo: ©Edmond Terakopian

Watermarks should be placed on the image itself. You should also have a creation year, so the central text reads “©Edmond Terakopian 2013”. You can also, like in this case, be subtle but still brand your work. If you look at previous posts on this blog, you will notice that I have a specific blog watermark on the images. Also, by looking through my Flickr, you can see watermarking there too. Facebook friends will also notice how I watermark all images there too. Protect yourself, your work and your subjects too. Take action.

Following on from this, we need to try and get this Act killed off. Lobby your MPs and speak to any photography associations and organisations (BPPA, NUJ, MPA, SWPP etc) you belong to and ask them to campaign against this (some are already doing this, but all the social/wedding associations need to act too).

I also feel, and have done for years, that metadata should not be editable by anyone else but the photographer (or their picture desk). IPTC should have a password protect feature, much like locked PDF files. It should also be illegal and technically impossible for metadata to be changed or erased from an image by websites it is being uploaded to. Perhaps this is an avenue worth exploring?

Sign The Petition

There’s a petition, kindly drawn up by Will Nicholls. Whilst the initiative is great, it is missing some key elements. Regardless, as it’s the only petition out there, I have signed it and would suggest everyone does too:

Stop Legalised Theft Of Copyrighted Works

Hopefully one of the associations will draft up a more comprehensive petition covering all aspects. As soon as this is available, I would urge all to join me in signing that one as well. The more pressure we can bring, the more chance we have of safeguarding our industry. We must stand up for our rights as no one else will.

Summing Up

Regardless of if you’re a proud parent taking pictures of your children or a professional photographer photographing news, weddings, portraits, landscapes and so on, all photographs uploaded to the internet will soon be in danger of getting stolen and used without your permission. Not only are you losing control of your images, but your subjects’ rights are also being violated. All legally. All thanks to the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill (ERRB) which received Royal Assent and is now an Act. This paves way for legislation. The fact that no Act has been stopped from becoming legislation since 1979 makes this extremely dangerous for anyone who takes pictures and puts them on the internet; FaceBook, Twitter and so on.

This will effect EVERYONE so act NOW.

Further Reading:

The Register

Stop 43

Out-Law

Stop 43 – 02

IPO

Copyright For Education

Photographer David Bailey’s letter to George Osborne in full:

 Dear George

I am writing because I am appalled at what the government is doing to our rights in the ERRB (Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill). Why the ERRB by the way? Why can’t copyright be dealt with properly in a proper Copyright Bill? I’m told everyone will be able to get their hands on our so-called “orphans” so libraries and museums can publish old photographs whose authors have long been forgotten. But never mind what’s lying around on dusty old shelves, what about the millions of “orphans” that are being created now every day!

Why? Because social media, and everyone else for that matter routinely strip our names and contact details from our digital files. They simply should not be allowed to get away with this. They can because our government refuses to give us the right to our names by our pictures (Moral rights). So now commercial organisations will be allowed to make money from our “orphans”, but not us, the creators.

This legislation should never have been even considered without first giving us our moral rights, and is contrary to our rights under the Berne Convention. Why the rush? A scheme, the Copyright Hub – a scheme backed by the government – is being developed to ensure that those who wish to find our pictures can not only do so quickly online, but also find the contact details of the pictures’ owners. You are about to put the cart before the horse.

I’m told the real reason for speed is that “releasing” orphans will create growth. We all understand the need for growth. But where’s the evidence? The seemingly impressive financial figures presented originally in the Hargreaves Review have mysteriously had to be revised – down by 97%! Which now apparently amount to no more than 80p per taxpayer per year. Given the damage this legislation will now cause to taxpaying creators, damage no-one has so far taken into account, the effect of this legislation on economic growth will in fact be negative.

It’s not too late to think again!

Best,

David Bailey

What’s Wrong With The Newspaper Industry

Press Photography & The Papers

A press card and a selection of media accreditation from over the years. June 12, 2012. Photo: Edmond Terakopian

The problems with the industry (normally and not just during this recession) are multiple; some do lay with the accountants who run most things (being qualified with arithmetic and spread sheet skills, or the understanding of formulas, in my mind does not give someone aesthetic understanding or the ability to have a news sense), weak picture editors, bad editors, visually less capable mass audience and the pandering of the papers to the weakest common denominator as opposed to trying to visually educate the readership a little. Not too long ago we had newspapers that ran the most amazing photography; informative, accurate, ethical, creative and mind blowingly powerful – and no, I’m not just talking about the broadsheets (as they were then) but a few tabloid papers too.

Another huge issue is the switch to digital and the ‘everyone’s a photographer’ syndrome; backed by accountants who see a picture as something that has four sides to it but have no ability to comprehend it’s content, importance or power. This also lead to the birth of the mass paparazzi – the most money paid for photography is for this type of content and the publications who print this material, sell the most, so have the biggest budgets.

The ‘new’ technology, called the internet also has had a detrimental effect to the traditional model of newspapers. A day late, even with great analysis and checked, journalistically correct information, is sometimes too late for readers. I saw new in quotes as anyone looking at most newspaper websites would thing the internet came to being a couple of months ago. It’s been with us long enough, yet few papers have learnt to design good, usable websites that harness the power of the web and deliver amazing content. The business model has to change too; good content needs to be paid for properly. Content is king; no good content means lower visitor hits, equalling less advertising revenue. It’s not rocket science! It is however beyond doubt the future (including mobile devices using the internet for delivery of content).

Let’s not forget though, as photographers we have our share of the blame. Some of this ignorance comes from the educational sector who are happy to teach Susan Sontag and theory, but when it comes to actual skills needed by photographers to survive, like knowing one’s rights and the law of copyright, they teach nothing. The rest of the blame is purely with us for not finding out.

We are signing away our copyright and future rights to our work, even though the law states that it’s ours. This is shortsighted and every time such a contract is signed, another nail is hammered into our collective coffin. There is no going back from this. Sooner than you know, we will retire and have no picture library of our own to fall back on; so, no books, no print sales and no exhibitions. My thoughts are that the bigger picture needs to be looked at; after all, this is a career and so, is long term.

We are killing our own industry too.