Jump to content

UK Copyright law on image reproduction clarified


Recommended Posts

May be of interest:

https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2023/12/29/court-of-appeal-ruling-will-prevent-uk-museums-from-charging-reproduction-feesat-last

 

https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1740793178733916526

 

This issue was i think prompted by Dr. Bendor Grosvenor who appears on UK TV from time to time in his BBC series 'Britain's Lost Masterpieces', I saw him mention it on his interestingTwitter feed some time ago:

 

 

Academics were effectively prevented from using photos of artworks they had personally taken to illustrate their articles or academic publications because the Museums claimed copyright and so requested fees that made it impractical for them use them. That's just my rather rushed summary but i think it's fair, however please read the background material to make up your own mind if it interests you.

 

 

 

Edited by Harry Harrison
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The case was about computer software, and although it hasn't yet been reported (as in transcribed into the BAILII database) AFAICS it was about copyright in GUIs. I can't determine whether the COA decided they were sufficiently original or not but that's not relevant. It has supposedly upped the bar on originality a bit in line with the Infopaq judgment at the CJEU.

In fact it hasn't changed much, the museums knew they didn't have any separate copyright in the copies and were merely charging for the service. It didn't limit what the likes of Grosvenor could do.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, M.Chapman said:

Interesting, thanks for posting. I wonder if Alamy will change their policy as a result?

 

Mark

In my view Alamy's policy goes well beyond copyright. It's a condition of contract in any case, so we're bound by it. Best not to set out our own individual "policies" on the forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, geogphotos said:

The issue with Alamy is that they sell licences for copyright free images - licences with restrictions which cannot possibly be enforced. 

Quite so, one expects buyers are aware of it. They're paying for the service of getting a large file- and that's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are a couple of posts from Bendor Grosvenor earlier in the year highlighting why he was concerned, as I see it it's not that they had to pay for a large file, it was that they could not use their own photos, it seems they can now:

 

https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1710211676400677366

 

https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1504404655463350273

 

 

 

Edited by Harry Harrison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Harry Harrison said:

Not sure what you're hoping to see, or are you doubting his assertion that scholars were not allowed to use their own photographs in their own publications?

Ah I see- we're at cross purposes- were museums claiming copyright in the artworks photographed?- that would be odd- still wants explaining. Or maybe it was a condition of access to preserve their picture library revenue.

But I don't see the connection with the CoA case now.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

h I see- we're at cross purposes- were museums claiming copyright in the artworks photographed?

Yes i think we are, my memory from seeing his posts was that they threatened prosecution if researchers used their own photos which would otherwise have been eminently possible, particularly with regard to details from paintings I would have thought. Still as I implied i haven't had time to look into it today, that garage isn't going to tidy itself, and then it looks like i'll have to take this keyboard apart so that i don't risk breaking a finger getting the 'shift' to work, I wondered if that coffee got inside.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Presumably museums are still entitled to restrict photography. So if they are unable to charge for 'reproduction rights' isn't there a real possibility that images will not be available for licence?

 

If they are making loses charging fees, they are not going to incur costs making images available for free. 

 

I suppose that they can sell access to those images through stock agencies such as Alamy and make revenue through that?

Edited by geogphotos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.