geogphotos

Infringement claim - UK Small Claims

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

........and well done on the 60,000+.

As a matter of interest, how did you find out about the infringement?

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

........and well done on the 60,000+.

As a matter of interest, how did you find out about the infringement?

 

The book is on sale in the xxxxx pub and I noticed a pic that looked suspiciously like mine......

Edited by geogphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

 

The book is on sale in the xxxxx pub and I noticed a pic that looked suspiciously like mine......

Pure luck, then. It pays to keep an eye open evidently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, geogphotos said:

The author of the book admits taking my photo from the internet 'accidentally'. 

 

I have requested what I think is a very reasonable fee for a quick and amicable settlement. He says he won't pay but that neither will the publisher because his contract makes him solely responsible ( or something).

 

Now, who would you go after - the author - or the publisher of the book?

 

My gut feeling is that I should be dealing with the publisher, and it is up to them to deal with their author should they need to recoup any costs. It was the publisher that I first contacted but then the author was obviously told to deal with me. 

 

Thanks Spacecadet for the information about the IPEC. At the moment that looks to be the way forward.

 

Most publishers require the authors to pay for the photographs in their books, but it can vary depending on the clout of the author. Heavily illustrated books would be an exception.

Your gut feeling is correct. The publisher is actually responsible for anything they publish, so you should go after the publisher.

The publisher could then easily deduct the payment they make to you, from the author’s royalty account.

Don’t let the publisher put you off. The agreement they have with their author is irrelevant to the situation, and no concern of yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Bill Brooks said:

 

Most publishers require the authors to pay for the photographs in their books, but it can vary depending on the clout of the author. Heavily illustrated books would be an exception.

Your gut feeling is correct. The publisher is actually responsible for anything they publish, so you should go after the publisher.

The publisher could then easily deduct the payment they make to you, from the author’s royalty account.

Don’t let the publisher put you off. The agreement they have with their author is irrelevant to the situation, and no concern of yours.

They have agreed to settle. So hopefully there will be no need to go down the Court route. 

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/06/2018 at 08:34, AndrewP said:

All this actually goes back to what's taught in schools. All pupils have access to Google and find photos to use in their school work, this then continues in college/university. When they then get a job and are asked to find a photo for a report/brochure/website they go straight to Google. That's when their boss gets sent a copyright infringement claim and in all the years the person has been sourcing photos from the internet through education they've never once been told about copyright.

Actually in the school I taught in (quit almost 8 years ago) the computing department taught the pupils that they could use images free for schoolwork*, but also taught them about copyright. I read the posters the pupils had made. However, the pupils were of the view that that was just what stupid old teachers thought, and wasn't true.

 

*but just before I left, a system called Glow was set up, which supplied many thousands of perfectly adequate photos (at that time),  in a closed system, which pupils and teachers had to use whenever possible. Ths system is (or was at the time) also used in England and Wales. Pretty strict about access - I was knocked off it a couple of days after I left, even though my GTC registration was valid for another four months, so I was eligble for doing supply, had I wished to.

 

Google themselves encourage this. I have said before that I was in another room during a Google talk in which they were talking particularly about accessibility in a working environment, and the speaker said, "Just Google images and paste them into your document like this ..." No mention of copyright (but I was't an official delegate, and listening from a 'room off' or I'd certainy have brought this up in the Q&A session).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the issues I have found trying to explain copyright to people is they cannot believe its correct that it is so simple - there seems to be an assumption that for something to be protected legally must involve complicated registering that there is no way I own the rights to whatever I have just taken or written because I pressed the button or hit some keys.  This feeds down into the whole google thing with the "but it didn't say it was copyrighted" bit.  People do not get that copyright is the default state and rights free is what has to be indicated they all assume it is the other way around - stuff is rights free unless indicated otherwise.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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