More jolly news on copyright

[Lastrega]

I've just had a read through this:  

 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/07/23/uk_gov_copyright_reforms_means_nobody_need_pay_for_images_again/

 

It makes for very gloomy reading. 

 

 

 

 

[Linda]

Yes that does stink. Copyright holders need to band together and make their voice loud enough to be hear to the idiots and also point out the serious loss of revenue they will be losing by these stupid law changes.

 

L

[Robert Brook]

The wording regarding quoting certainly needs tightening, but is welcome nonetheless.

Reviews, criticism, etc are an essential part of the business. I have had concerns that people who have done online reviews of work of mine that happens to be with one of the two major players are taking risks, and once put a journalist reviewer off for that reason. Otherwise I welcome the practice, even when a reviewer isn't being nice. The more photography is discussed in a serious way, the better for the medium.

"(1ZA) Copyright in a work is not infringed by the use of a quotation from the work (whether for criticism or review or otherwise) provided that, (a) the work has been made available to the public, ( the use of the quotation is fair dealing with the work"

Here it is the 'otherwise' that is problematic, and smacks of either incompetence or dishonesty. Or, as usual, a bit of both.

But I certainly won't be joining any campaigns to stop the practice altogether.

 

(Aren't smileys a pain?  it is supposed to be a 'b' in brackets).

[dov makabaw]

The UK government is trying to cut costs wherever it can. Clearly they are not going to steal pictures when they can make it legal for them to just take them. Abuse of power springs to mind.

 

 

dov