UPDATE
Today I received news that our government have backed down on clause 43 of the digital rights bill.
Many thousands of photographers have campaigned against this clause that could have seen our livelihoods threatened. Congratulations to us all and many thanks to the people who helped.
———————
I have been aware for around a year that the government intended to rewrite a large proportion of the UK copyright laws surrounding the digital online use of photographs, in fact, I wrote about in this blog article. I was also made aware a few months ago on how the government planned to give non-commercial websites free reign on any image they so desire in an attempt to “curb copyright infringement” and to “make getting clearance to use an image easier” these statements are not only laughable but they are totally ludicrous. Its similar to saying we are removing all national speed limits in an attempt to reduce speeding offences. There has been a petition set up on the 10 Downing street website and I urge all of you to sign up here.
The government has now gone one step further by trying to force through the Digital economy bill. This bill basically states, among other things, that if the copyright owner of a photograph can not be found after a reasonable search, commercial publications can use said work after paying a small fee to a collecting body. The bill calls these photographs “orphaned works” and as the copyright owner of an image used in this way you are able to apply to receive whats left of this tiny fee after both the collecting authority and the government have had their share, thats assuming you notice your image is being used in the first place.
To compound the problems the bill makes no definition of what a reasonable search is and makes no attempt to ensure orphaned works are avoided in the first place. In virtually all occasions that a photographer is either commissioned by a publication, or a publication legally licences an image, they state that no copyright information can be placed on the image and in many cases that are not obliged to print a by line stating who took the image and both of these two actions will lead to orphaned works. Once a professional photographer loses their right to control where their images are reproduced they also lose the right to this revenue stream which will push prices up to cover this missing revenue. It also removes a photographers right to decide where and for what purpose their photographs are used for, for instance, I may decline the use of my images for uses that I find either distasteful or morally objectionable, once this bill is passed all of my wishes and the wishes of my clients will be ignored after a “reasonable search”.
If your reading this as either a customer or as someone with an interest of photography please do not assume this only applies to professional photographers, in fact it may apply more to you that it does to me. I am fairly easy to find, a search for Martyn Greswolde on google.co.uk shows that any of the links from the first page will get to my contact information. I also embed code (called IPTC data) into every single photograph I take with my contact details, web address and copyright information. How many casual photographers are this easy to find? to compound the issue many casual photographers post images on sites such as Flickr using nicknames that would be almost impossible to trace back to an individual, so your images are more at risk than mine.
You may think that it would be cool and flattering if your images were used and if you could receive a couple of pounds for the privilege everything is great but what if your image is used to advertise an embarrassing product or worse for something you find questionable? You would have no recourse to have the image removed but you would still receive the few pounds if you could prove you took the image. There are several petitions on the 10 Downing street website relating to this bill and they can be found here, I would urge everyone of you to read these petitions and sign up for them.
Once again the UK government have proven they can not be trusted with individuals rights and are not concerned by public or small businesses concerns or opinions.
There are a lot of web resources available on these topics, a few I have found useful are here-
Long but very detailed – http://www.copyrightaction.com/forum/uk-gov-nationalises-orphans-and-bans-non-consensual-photography-in-public?page=1
or a more concise post – http://www.wirefresh.com/uk-photographers-stop-government-plans-to-strip-you-of-your-copyright/
1 comment