# Image ownership (UK)



## Berto... (Sep 1, 2010)

Hi guys and gals, first post, so not sure if this is the right section... apologies if it should be somewhere else.

Anyway, a friend of mine recently entered a photo competiton on another forum... he won. However, he had previously uploaded the same image to the website of the angling club he belongs to, and the administrator of the club website is now claiming ownership of the image, and says that my friend is breaking copyright law on HIS image!!!  the administrator is demanding that he removes it from all other areas he may have posted, removes it from the angling forum, and insists that he is the legal owner of the image and it's copyright.

What are the in's and out's of this situation?

Berto


----------



## tirediron (Sep 1, 2010)

Wow... that's someone with a nerve I wouldn't want in my tooth.  I can't comment on the legal aspects of it, but there are a couple here who will likely be able to speak with more knowledge.  I would strongly suggest consulting a lawyer however.


----------



## Mbnmac (Sep 1, 2010)

If the admin didn't pay for it, he doesn't own it.

Even if he did pay for it, unless something was stated to the fact that only he was to have this photo, your buddy should still be able to do whatever he likes with it


----------



## Berto... (Sep 1, 2010)

Mbnmac said:


> If the admin didn't pay for it, he doesn't own it.
> 
> Even if he did pay for it, unless something was stated to the fact that only he was to have this photo, your buddy should still be able to do whatever he likes with it


 
That's what I thought.  So, are you saying that in order for the copyright to change ownership, then money, or a contract of some kind has to change hands?

My pal is also worried about the 'small print' on the website:

 "No part of this web site may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
Electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and
Retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher". 

Sounds like a load of worthless nonsense to me.


----------



## Flash Harry (Sep 1, 2010)

If your mate wasn't commissioned/employed by this cretin while the photo was taken and he has the original file from camera, then its his, whether he uploaded it or not. The trouble starts if he was paid by this bloke to shoot the pic, and there's also the dodgy grabbers in this country, the BBC and a lot of big name mags have in their T&C's that if the image is freely given to the mag/papers/site they can use it any way they like, even without a credit to the photographer, he did place the pic in the public domain but this bloke hasn't a leg to stand on regards usage or copyright, warn him to remove it from the site or you'll take legal action, in future place a copyright notice across the image. H

PS. the cheeky git, a notice like that to protect his intellectual property yet nicking off someone else, see a solicitor or simply send him a bill for displaying the image online, usage rights.


----------



## Flash Harry (Sep 1, 2010)

post the site name, its no big deal


----------



## skieur (Sep 1, 2010)

The Internet is definitely NOT public domain and by uploading the image to a site the poster has NOT given away his image to the administrator of the site, nor his rights to use the image as he sees fit.  The administrator has NO rights to that image beyond displaying it on the site and even that right becomes questionable if the poster demands that it be removed.

skieur


----------



## Flash Harry (Sep 2, 2010)

skieur said:


> The Internet is definitely NOT public domain and by uploading the image to a site the poster has NOT given away his image to the administrator of the site, nor his rights to use the image as he sees fit.  The administrator has NO rights to that image beyond displaying it on the site and even that right becomes questionable if the poster demands that it be removed.
> 
> skieur



Of course the net is in the public domain, the rest of what you say is correct but there are many sites you have to sign up agreeing to the T&C's which allow these sites usage freedoms. As I said over here the BBC and most magazine sites have similar terms, newspapers are always stealing imagery from the net and face no punishment or pay fees as they reckon uncopyrighted images they use are freely available and already in the public domain. This is the reason I rarely change my own site images or upload anything I wish to sell, either on here or anywhere else for that matter, presently our government are looking into what they call "orphan" works online being free for the taking, so basically without a copyright notice on the image and your details in the exif/meta they reckon its fair to take/use/display or whatever they wish to these "orphans", quality too matters little as newspapers lay off their staffers and publish garbage quality mobile phone "newsworthy" shots. H

PS. Try googling your own name then click the images tag on the google page, it'll bring up every post you made and whoever's image you discussed, try selling the image, you'll make nothing from it as the majority will simply download a copy for free


----------



## Berto... (Sep 2, 2010)

So guys, before my pal goes wading in... this is cut and dried, black and white - the website/administrator definately has no right to claim copyright ownership of the image simply because the image was uploaded to his site?

The administrator seems to think that this - "No part of this web site may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
Electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and
Retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher".  covers him, and implies transfer of coyright ownership of any images uploaded to his site. As far as I can see, it would (possibly) only cover him for text content, and any images for which HE already owns the copyright.

So, the question is, really; are there any cases or instances that you guys know of, where the uploading of an image to a website means that the website owners then legally become the owners of the copyright? 

Sorry to drag this on guys, just want to be 100% sure.

Thanks to all for the help so far

Berto.


----------



## tirediron (Sep 2, 2010)

This is an Internet forum; none of us are lawyers nor do most of us play them on television.  If this is a serious issue (ie not just injured pride or a couple of dollars lost) *CONSULT A SOLICITOR*.


----------



## danielrwelch (Sep 2, 2010)

Is it not possible for your friend to edit the post and remove it from the forum?


----------



## skieur (Sep 2, 2010)

Berto... said:


> So guys, before my pal goes wading in... this is cut and dried, black and white - the website/administrator definately has no right to claim copyright ownership of the image simply because the image was uploaded to his site?
> 
> The administrator seems to think that this - "No part of this web site may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
> Electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and
> ...


 
The web site is copyrighted just as a book is copyrighted.  Both may contain photos but the photo copyright belongs to the photographer not the "publisher" unless the photographer by contract has signed his rights over the the website or book publisher.

By the way, you did not "copy" the photo from his web site, since it was yours in the first place, so it cannot be construed that you violated his web site copyright at all.

skieur


----------



## Berto... (Sep 2, 2010)

tirediron said:


> This is an Internet forum; none of us are lawyers nor do most of us play them on television. If this is a serious issue (ie not just injured pride or a couple of dollars lost) *CONSULT A SOLICITOR*.


 
Oooooh! Get you. Thanks for that pearl of wisdom, Tired hard-on. Forgive me for labouring under the misapprehension that some of you guys might have the answer to a simple photo related question.


----------



## skieur (Sep 2, 2010)

tirediron said:


> This is an Internet forum; none of us are lawyers nor do most of us play them on television. If this is a serious issue (ie not just injured pride or a couple of dollars lost) *CONSULT A SOLICITOR*.


 
Sorry, tirediron, but this advice is NOT really appropriate. Anyone posting for legal comments is looking for general legal concepts in this area from those that have photographic and legal experience, so that he/she can decide whether it is worthwhile going to a lawyer and taking action.

Moreover, you obviously are not aware that most lawyers have limited or no knowledge in this area and consulting one of these solicitor's would be wasting your money.

I argued against a well-known copyright lawyer in an open media forum on copyright issues in person and won, so unless you know the law yourself, I would be VERY CAREFUL in choosing a solicitor or evaluating the value of his/her advice.

skieur


----------



## skieur (Sep 2, 2010)

Flash Harry said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> > The Internet is definitely NOT public domain and by uploading the image to a site the poster has NOT given away his image to the administrator of the site, nor his rights to use the image as he sees fit. The administrator has NO rights to that image beyond displaying it on the site and even that right becomes questionable if the poster demands that it be removed.
> ...


 
My own name turned up nothing on google.  My user name turned up my avatar and one other image out of 50 or more posted images.  No posts showed up at all unless I specified where to look and then it was only the most recent.  There was no posts at all from other than TPF.

skieur


----------



## Berto... (Sep 2, 2010)

skieur said:


> Sorry, tirediron, but this advice is NOT really appropriate. Anyone posting for legal comments is looking for general legal concepts in this area from those that have photographic and legal experience, so that he/she can decide whether it is worthwhile going to a lawyer and taking action.


 
Exactly. Thankyou Skieur, and thanks to all who who had something useful and helpful to offer. I think I have all the info I need to help rid my pal of this parasite.

Berto


----------



## skieur (Sep 2, 2010)

Flash Harry said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> > The Internet is definitely NOT public domain and by uploading the image to a site the poster has NOT given away his image to the administrator of the site, nor his rights to use the image as he sees fit. The administrator has NO rights to that image beyond displaying it on the site and even that right becomes questionable if the poster demands that it be removed.
> ...


 
I am aware of at least one substantial win by an american photographer against a British sports magazine that stole his images off the net. By the way a copyright notice on the image is not required and I also know sports photographers who routinely search the Internet for their images.  If they find them, they invoice at several times their regular rate and if it is not paid, they sue.  They have had considerable success.

skieur


----------



## KmH (Sep 2, 2010)

Berto... said:


> So guys, before my pal goes wading in... this is cut and dried, black and white - the website/administrator definately has no right to claim copyright ownership of the image simply because the image was uploaded to his site?


No one can say for certain. There isn't even certainty once adjudicated by a court of UK law, because even then there is an appeals process that could net a different result.

Accepting online legal advice as, "cut and dried, black and white", could well cost your friend.

Were it me, I would worry over the contest rules. Many disqualify images that have previously been displayed online, and/or require the winner transfer copyright ownership to the entity that conducted the contest.

Does your pal have the financial means to defend a lawsuit, if need be?


----------



## skieur (Sep 2, 2010)

KmH said:


> Berto... said:
> 
> 
> > So guys, before my pal goes wading in... this is cut and dried, black and white - the website/administrator definately has no right to claim copyright ownership of the image simply because the image was uploaded to his site?
> ...


 
Both KmH and I are correct.  Unless he agreed to some contract or rules giving up his rights to the images, then they remain the photographers.

I should point out that many contest venues only ask for copyright of the image in order to legally display it as the winner of the particular contest on the net or in print. 

If he agreed to some contract or rules, then it might depend on how strong a lawyer is in making the point that the terms/rules were unreasonable and whether a judge buys the argument or not.

Does the offer of a prize, give the contest organizer the copyright to all images entered, (if that is in the rules) or should the contest organizer be paying the photographer for any use that is not contest-related?

skieur

skieur.


----------



## HeadshotLondon (Sep 6, 2010)

In UK if the photographer has taken an image - the rights for the image will belong to him unless he has signed a contract and / or sold the rights to another person. So noone - model, site admin, your pet, etc...could claim the right of ownership for the image. That is the law in the UK.

http://www.headshotlondon.co.uk


----------



## snichols (Sep 8, 2010)

Totally agree - the photographer retains the copyright unless there has been a specific contract between the commissioner and the photographer to agree to the transfer and/or that all rights are being bought.

The fact that the web site didn't actually pay for the image probably doesn't help you much, but it is bl**dy cheeky.

See P-16: Photography and copyright

Steve

Author of "Better PR and Editorial Photography"- see Learn how to take editorial and PR images you can be proud of


----------

