Help! Legal Question!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Personally I'd seek advice from someone with a legal qualification.

Hope you get it sorted:)
 
Coventry Cathedral is unique in that all the buildings within its precinct and all the works of art, whether on the exterior walls or contained inside them are owned by the Chapter and are therefore covered by the Cathedral’s copyright.
Click to expand...

Just owning a work of art does not give you the copyright. Most works of art within a cathedral and indeed the cathedral itself will be old enough to be outside the scope of copyright law.

It looks like you signed an agreement to a use restriction, not a transfer of copyright. Unless you specifically signed over the copyright of your images, they are still yours.


Steve.
 
It is also mandatory that all images used in this way must acknowledge that permission has been obtained from the Cathedral authorities and identify that the owner of the copyright is Coventry Cathedral.
Click to expand...

I would translate this as meaning the copyright of the existing art and buildings which they think they own, not your images.


Steve.
 
The church usually know there stuff.. i doubt very much that there as amatuer as people will suggest.. I would say get legal advice but dont get your hopes up... sorry but :(
 
Try www.own-it.org

They are specialists in copyright and IP issues and will help you free of charge.

It could be that the cathedral is trying to pull a fast one.

But note that the cathedral itself is a modern one, isn't it, and copyright might still exist on the design.

I honestly don't know and I doubt anyone on here will know.
 
Reading that and if you have signed it suggests that they are right, as in if you don't like the contract, don't sign it and don't use the images......

I would get qualified legal representation on board and fast, keep us informed and good luck !
 
I can't believe they telephoned you over this matter. Are you sure it's not a prankster?

Next time they call, tell them you've moved to Warsaw.
 
What is it that you have published the pictures in? Can you not pay them the fee? What are they asking you to do?
 
Tell them that you asked God for forgiveness, and he forgave :p It's his house not theirs!

In all seriousness, legal advice is the way forward...
 
Do you have a contract with the cathedral? i.e. did you pay them anything?

Or did you just sign the agreement?


Steve.
 
I paid them £25. And, yes, I signed it. However I very much read it as you did re: the copyright being of the things within the Cathedral, not the images.

Bear in mind that taking pictures of any buildings/public artwork that is in a area to which the public has access does NOT breach the copyright of the artist/copyright owner at all in any way... Neither does publishing them... It was only courtesy that made me ask in the first place... o.O
 
Hi Xarra
Why have you removed the original post?? This thread makes no sense now ??
:thinking:
 
I think I would ignore this as the terms stated in their agreement go much further than the actual law.

They do not own the copyright of the cathedral. If anyone does, it's the designer/architect and a photograph of it does not constitute a breach of copyright anyway.

As for the works of art, the copyright of these belongs to the artist unless it has been assigned to the cathedral (which I doubt).

It is also not a breach of copyright if one or more of the works of art were to appear in an interior view. i.e. not a straight duplication. It's a bit like a photograph of the high street which contains the logos of McDonald's, Tesco and Lloyds Bank. They are all registered designs and trade marks but no offence is cxomitted by taking and publishing such an image.

p.s. I like the idea of your book. The title implies that the images are those which are visible from a public place but are those which people pass by every day without noticing. If this is the case then I don't think the cathedral has grounds for a complaint



Steve.
 
Makes sense then! Good luck with whatever the issue is !
 
Xarra said:
I paid them £25. And, yes, I signed it. However I very much read it as you did re: the copyright being of the things within the Cathedral, not the images.

Bear in mind that taking pictures of any buildings/public artwork that is in a area to which the public has access does NOT breach the copyright of the artist/copyright owner at all in any way... Neither does publishing them... It was only courtesy that made me ask in the first place... o.O
Click to expand...

Well, removing the original post is REALLY BAAD forum etiquette. I read it as if you want to take photos and use them commercially, they belong to us, you signed the release and then didn't correctly credit them ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top