| A little debate about copyright? 13:41 - Nov 10 with 1364 views | giant_stow |
A charity i work for has found itself in the sights of a copyright company for images used on it's website. Apparently, despite getting clearance to use certain photos from a third party, it turns out that the third party didn't own those photos afterall.
This has now been picked up by an images rights company who are demanding sums in the region of £500 per image. They are also trawling the site (which has been going for years, so has lots of content) and each day are submitting a new claim on the chairty, who are now sh1tting themselves.
Personally, I think this is bottom feeding, but perhaps a photographer out there may feel differently? Surely the best thing would be to ask the rights holder whether they object to images being used innocently like this, before sending large invoices out? [Post edited 10 Nov 2022 13:46]
|  |
| |  |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:45 - Nov 10 with 1321 views | stringy |
would be nice if they gave you a cease and desist demand with a seven day implementation to give you time to get permissions or remove the image
alas they're never going to be chasing up the real owners for you, don't make money that way |  | | |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:48 - Nov 10 with 1300 views | giant_stow |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:45 - Nov 10 by stringy |
would be nice if they gave you a cease and desist demand with a seven day implementation to give you time to get permissions or remove the image
alas they're never going to be chasing up the real owners for you, don't make money that way |
Yeah that would have been fair, but they're looking for a fee for use upto this point. Some of the pics getting flagged have been in for years.
I spose I'm howling into the wind really - just seems so rough. | |
| |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:48 - Nov 10 with 1290 views | stringy |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:48 - Nov 10 by giant_stow |
Yeah that would have been fair, but they're looking for a fee for use upto this point. Some of the pics getting flagged have been in for years.
I spose I'm howling into the wind really - just seems so rough. |
yeah the fact that it's a charity... | | | |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:50 - Nov 10 with 1280 views | giant_stow |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:48 - Nov 10 by stringy |
yeah the fact that it's a charity... |
Yeah there was no malice in this, just cock-up, despite trying to do the right thing. | |
| |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:52 - Nov 10 with 1277 views | homer_123 |
Standard practice Ulla.
Also, sadly, form the Charities perspective, there is usually precedent for this, so would be hard to go to court and win.
These companies, usually just wanted a settlement/ pay off - so a case of negotiating with them. |  |
| |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:56 - Nov 10 with 1261 views | giant_stow |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:52 - Nov 10 by homer_123 |
Standard practice Ulla.
Also, sadly, form the Charities perspective, there is usually precedent for this, so would be hard to go to court and win.
These companies, usually just wanted a settlement/ pay off - so a case of negotiating with them. |
yeah I guess you're right. And also about not going anywhere near a court on this - just not worth the risk.
Stop the bludy world... | |
| |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:57 - Nov 10 with 1252 views | homer_123 |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:56 - Nov 10 by giant_stow |
yeah I guess you're right. And also about not going anywhere near a court on this - just not worth the risk.
Stop the bludy world... |
Yep, noting nefarious from the charity I am sure, an honest mistake but ruddy costly. :( | |
| |
| A little debate about copyright? on 14:24 - Nov 10 with 1184 views | WeWereZombies |
| A little debate about copyright? on 13:52 - Nov 10 by homer_123 |
Standard practice Ulla.
Also, sadly, form the Charities perspective, there is usually precedent for this, so would be hard to go to court and win.
These companies, usually just wanted a settlement/ pay off - so a case of negotiating with them. |
And the first move for your charity (this part of the reply is for Ullaa) would be an offer of a big thank you on the charity's social media, website and printed material for allowing the image rights to be used to no cost...
Whilst you are probably right that image rights companies have a standard practice of grabbing all they can for use of their content (regardless to the way in which they have a legal entitlement to that content), especially in these straightened times, there can also be a cost to them if they are seen as exploiting a bank balance built up from donations from well meaning members of the public. The ultimately unsuccessful legal case that MacDonalds waged against Greenpeace London being a case in point. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| A little debate about copyright? on 14:27 - Nov 10 with 1173 views | BarcaBlue |
A couple of things. We had a similar issue when I had a software company. We checked the image in question and it actually came from what was then Microsoft Gallery and a freelancer had passed it off as their own to the image company. They apologised and removed the image from their stock. Worth checking the real origin of the image.
Before finding the image we asked advice, and although not required, it was suggested we delete the image and ignore the request. I can't say if that will work or not and can't recommend it from personal experience. |  | | |
| A little debate about copyright? on 14:29 - Nov 10 with 1166 views | keebsdad |
Does it actually have the jurisdiction to do it? I nearly got caught a few years ago by an organisation claiming to be empowered to enforce 'performing rights' legislation for music played in the chain of shops I owed. It was only when I checked with the actual 'Performing Rights Society' that I found out they were scammers. |  | | |
| A little debate about copyright? on 14:30 - Nov 10 with 1161 views | giant_stow |
| A little debate about copyright? on 14:27 - Nov 10 by BarcaBlue |
A couple of things. We had a similar issue when I had a software company. We checked the image in question and it actually came from what was then Microsoft Gallery and a freelancer had passed it off as their own to the image company. They apologised and removed the image from their stock. Worth checking the real origin of the image.
Before finding the image we asked advice, and although not required, it was suggested we delete the image and ignore the request. I can't say if that will work or not and can't recommend it from personal experience. |
thanks fellas - I'll pass these tips on to the boss now.
Edit: done. (too many) fingers crossed. [Post edited 10 Nov 2022 14:40]
| |
| |
| A little debate about copyright? on 18:53 - Nov 10 with 977 views | Bent_double |
Can't offer any advice I'm afraid, but I do think that antiquated copyright laws need reforming.
The PRS/PPL lot finally caught up with me about 4 years ago and I now have to pay a yearly license fee for the TV's in my guest rooms that *might* play music, or a TV jingle that someone has written and needs to be compensated for. Not a large fee, but I just don't feel that I benefit in any way from this, so struggle to see why I should have to pay it. Not quite the same as a pub/bar/shop that uses music to encourage customers in and spend money.
A few months ago, another company , MPLC, wrote to me informing that I need another license for all these TVs as they show programs/films, and anyone watching them (in the privacy of the room) is considered a 'public performance' Ridiculous, again not a huge fee, but easy money for these companies. Honestly, what's the difference between that, and someone sitting at home watching a film in their lounge, which they don't need a license for?
Try not paying any of these licenses, and they will throw everything at you, and the law, of course, is on their side, regardless of how daft it seems. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
