Nick Grimshaw steals image

F

Ferj

Messages
1,655
Edit My Images
No
I don't know if anyone else was listening to Radio 1 breakfast this morning, but while it's not my favourite station it was on in our house.

I was listening to Nick Grimshaw talking about Glastonbury when he says live on air "I Google image searched Michael Eavis and stole a picture of a news website for my instagram". So, thinking that's a bit off I searched for his instagram and found the stolen picture.

I took a screen shot of it then searched for the image online, finding it on the Bolton News. There was a clear copyright warning & also credit to associated press & the photographer. So I tweeted the photographer & emailed AP (with screen shots). I also sent a message to the BBC.

I know we can't prevent image theft online but with "celebrities" blatantly telling millions of listeners I draw the line! I'm pretty sure the BBC would chase up any image thefts or copyright breaches!

So anyhow I don't know if I over reacted but it just peed me off!
 
Will be interesting to see what they say in reply.
 
The photographer must be laughing - it's payday! :)
 
That photo is used in other articles with a PA copyright attached. Press Association?
 
He shared it on Instagram. hardly "stealing"

Nothing to see here.
 
If Grimshaw has used a PA image for work, surely it'll be covered by their annual fee to PA?
 
He shared it on Instagram... how is that work?
 
I still don't see the big deal. Why are you all so bothered by this? It's a press image released by a press agency... of course it's going to get shared LOL
 
Pookeyhead said:
I still don't see the big deal. Why are you all so bothered by this? It's a press image released by a press agency... of course it's going to get shared LOL
Click to expand...
Shockingly we agree for once loads of Instagram is in breach of copyright but nobody is making any money out of it!
 
Really? They take and use an image without permission... Why is that not theft when it is used by someone else?
 
Theft is when someone takes something from you so denying you the use of it yourself. When someone takes a copy of something, you still have the original so it is not stealing or theft.

It has its own word because it is different.


Steve.
 
Steve Smith said:
Theft is when someone takes something from you so denying you the use of it yourself. When someone takes a copy of something, you still have the original so it is not stealing or theft.

It has its own word because it is different.
Click to expand...

The broken record goes around and around.
We all know what is meant. Perhaps your lawyering skills could be used for something more important.
 
st599 said:
If Grimshaw has used a PA image for work, surely it'll be covered by their annual fee to PA?
Click to expand...
If this is the case, it's not even infringement, can someone clarify or it seems like a real non event, with the op potentially making a fool of themselves.
 
RBaker said:
Perhaps your lawyering skills could be used for something more important.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it would be better if people used the right words rather than the one which means something other than what they think it means.

RBaker said:
The broken record goes around and around.
Click to expand...

Surely, if it was broken, it would have stopped!


Steve.
 
Last edited:
Hardly theft I grab all sorts of pics to pop on facebook to share with my wife usually mice or birds and things that will make her smile.
its naughty infringent at best, you cannot steal a digital picture unless you take all the copies.
 
Steve Smith said:
Theft is when someone takes something from you so denying you the use of it yourself. When someone takes a copy of something, you still have the original so it is not stealing or theft.

It has its own word because it is different.


Steve.
Click to expand...


quite right
 
Chipper said:
Really? They take and use an image without permission... Why is that not theft when it is used by someone else?
Click to expand...
The legal definition of theft is "to dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving him of it".

Both main elements are missing, it wasn't dishonestly appropriated (anyone can lawfully click and press save), and the owner isnt being deprived of the item, in this case the image.

Thats why its solely a civil matter, hense copyright infringement.
 
Ok..thanks. So, what redress does he have or is it just how it is these days?
 
It would be a private civil process in the main. A civil claim for damages, for any potential loss of income relative to a properly obtained and licenced image, and what the photographer might receive in those circumstances.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top