Flicrk use by BBC

Is it possible that they have permission but the photographer did not want to be named publicly so requested the flickr username to be used instead :shrug:
I doubt the BBC would do something like give a credit like that without asking first.
 
It's an interesting ask. I'll read this thread with interest.

While those in the know are at it, can someone tell me if THIS guy is aloud to make those photo books up too? (sorry for the slight hijack :$)
 
Seems the book guy is using his own shots in the books or it there more to the story?
 
If it's CC then the BBC are well within their rights, as long as it's the correct CC license.
 
pxl8 said:
Seems the book guy is using his own shots in the books or it there more to the story?
Click to expand...

Well I thought that initially, but then it says on all the covers "Other peoples photographs" :shrug:
 
KayJay said:
If it's CC then the BBC are well within their rights, as long as it's the correct CC license.
Click to expand...

It's the one I linked to which was taken from the photo on flickr. Free for non-commercial use with credit and no derived works.
 
Jo said:
Well I thought that initially, but then it says on all the covers "Other peoples photographs" :shrug:
Click to expand...

Presumably he's used shots that have the correct CC licence on flickr too. Given how well flickr members police it I suspect if he was doing something wrong it would have been spotted by now?
 
Also surely it would be courteous to link to his flickr page? Maybe not.
 
pxl8 said:
Presumably he's used shots that have the correct CC licence on flickr too. Given how well flickr members police it I suspect if he was doing something wrong it would have been spotted by now?
Click to expand...

I thought that also, but then he has everything hidden and has no contacts, so I dunno ... just a bad feeling I guess, which is why I mentioned it.

Also he is selling them ... the quote below was on THIS image:

This book is composed of snapshots found on the many sites of the world’s ever-growing online picture pool. Each book is customised for the individual buyer. There are no two identical copies of The Showbag Book.
Click to expand...
 
KayJay said:
Also surely it would be courteous to link to his flickr page? Maybe not.
Click to expand...

The BBC performed within the CC licence why they didn't go the extra mile I can't say but they might tell you if you were to ask them.

Jo said:
I thought that also, but then he has everything hidden and has no contacts, so I dunno ... just a bad feeling I guess, which is why I mentioned it.

Also he is selling them ... the quote below was on THIS image:
Click to expand...

I guess the only person who knows is the guy, ask him. Say you're interested in buying a copy and does the book include a list of credits?
 
It's a pretty old story that, I remember seeing the photo when he first uploaded it to his flickr.
 
I thought this was a breach of Flickr's terms...ie use of an image from Flickr had to have a link back to the Flickr page

The Flickr service makes it possible to post content hosted on Flickr to outside web sites. However, pages on other web sites that display content hosted on flickr.com must provide a link from each photo or video back to its page on Flickr.
Click to expand...
 
Gwaelod said:
I thought this was a breach of Flickr's terms...ie use of an image from Flickr had to have a link back to the Flickr page
Click to expand...

That's for the account holders. It's to stop people using flickr as purely a hosting site.
 
"You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform your work - and derivative works based upon it - but for noncommercial purposes only."

I'd say the BBC were a commercial organisation, however I'll bet the person who took the pic will probably be happy to get their pic used.

Being that they took the picture on London Underground property, probably without permission, I'd imagine they'd be best just to keep quiet about it :naughty:
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
They would not be getting paid in anyway to show that photo so its non-commerial use. Also there aren't any adverts or commercials on BBC they are funded by the licence fee - the entire organisation is non-commercial
Click to expand...

No theyre not, theyre *part* funded by the license fee.

They ARE a commercial organisation. :)
 
By non-commercial use he probably means that it's ok for editorial use like in this instance.
 
:agree:

Editorial use would not be considered commercial. If the BBC turned it into a postcard/puzzle/calendar they would certainly have exceeded the terms of the licence.
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
The BBC shop is part of BBC Worldwide which is not the same as BBC.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that while the BBC don't have shareholders to take the profit, they still do operate commercially. The BBC Shop being one of them.

Sure it's under the BBCWorldwide umbrella, but where does the profit go.......back to the BBC ;)

The website isn't funded entirely by the license fee. It doesn't work like that does it. The license fee goes into the pot, so to speak.

The point I'm getting at, is that the BBC are just like any other commercial entity when it comes to paying for staff, work and contracts. They pay staff, they buy things. So they should be paying for photographs.

As it is though, they don't because they put it under a guise.
Whichever honcho thought of taking the BBC down the direction of what they call 'User Generated Content' is a genius.

"How can we still operate, but get all our stuff for free" ;)
 
As stated above the image is being used in an editorial context (news story) as opposed to a commercial context (advertising a product etc) so it does not matter if the BBC is a commercial entity or not...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top