My Photo Used Without Permission

What would you want / expect for use of the image?

It's not a trick question - complaining that someone has done you wrong, doesn't help with a fix.

A straightforward case would be - they should have asked and paid the going rate - the answer beng; send them an email stating that fact with payment details.
 
Firstly, they are a registered charity so maybe an initial step is a polite contact to see if it can be resolved amicably.

Having said that, have you in mind just what you want to happen???
 
In the source code for the page it mentions your name
Here
"https://www.bto.org/sites/default/f...und/008846-cuckoo-robin-lee.jpg?itok=02KMAm4h"

Not sure whether that throws significant light on the issue for you???

And doing a Google search digging took me to this
https://www.google.com/search?q=cuckoo&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&tbs=simg:CAESswIJdWteaiAIm6UapwILELCMpwgaYQpfCAMSJ54VqRXdFuwL6woArxXqC_1QKtBXRKK4i9CnQKPMpiST1KbI3rSLcIRowfsw5Aqdo6Og01gGuEUBIRs-k7Phs0Nmn-0DlVHrdQidNJhQsedxxmNFfpfJ2IZKxIAQMCxCOrv4IGgoKCAgBEgT0BY37DAsQne3BCRqgAQokChFldXJvcGVhbiBzdGFybGluZ9qliPYDCwoJL20vMDFsMzdxCiIKEGV1cm9wZWFuIHN3YWxsb3fapYj2AwoKCC9tLzBoaHRxChwKCWJsYWNrYmlyZNqliPYDCwoJL20vMDE5N213ChcKBWZpbmNo2qWI9gMKCggvbS8wMzM2aAodCgt3YXRlciBvdXplbNqliPYDCgoIL20vMGs1emsM&fir=aoambbLiNLZLvM%3A%2Cugxla-RCpe6fyM%2C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kQtCMDyamcXZcOhHDRacXsu_kQfOg&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjJ4onNk5zjAhUjUBUIHfS0CLwQ9QEwAnoECAEQBA#imgrc=aoambbLiNLZLvM:&vet=1

Where it shows a joint attribution Robin Lee/BTO

You had best reach out to them and find our what they have to say if you have never licensed that image to anyone let alone the BTO???
 
Last edited:
So they've credited a guy called Alan McFadyen; is that you?

edit... ignore that; wrong image.
 
Last edited:
@Phil V - no not complaining but was asking about TPers experience in dealing such a situation.

Since they are charity I probably won't ask for monies however I do not like the edited image posted on their website. I'll think about this overnight and email them my expectation.

Thanks all, it is my intention to resolve this amicably and professionally without causing any issues.
 
Phil V said:
So they've credited a guy called Alan McFadyen; is that you?
Click to expand...
Phil

The MacFadyen image is not the one in question, it is the header picture which has no obvious attribution compared to the one you mention ;)
 
Could you identify exactly which image please? I can't match any of the photographs on your Flickr account with the ones on the page you've linked to.
 
Come on guys ~ read my post #7 where Robin is mentioned in combination with the BTO.....inferring they have bought a license??? ;)
 
Last edited:
robinsslee said:
Hmm... I can't see where BTO credit Alan McFadyen? I know the fact the wide-angle image was Alan's image.
Click to expand...

In Chrome all i have to do if hover my cursor over the image......but that same does not happen with yours in the header.
 
Box Brownie said:
In the source code for the page it mentions your name
Here
"https://www.bto.org/sites/default/f...und/008846-cuckoo-robin-lee.jpg?itok=02KMAm4h"

Not sure whether that throws significant light on the issue for you???

And doing a Google search digging took me to this
https://www.google.com/search?q=cuckoo&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&tbs=simg:CAESswIJdWteaiAIm6UapwILELCMpwgaYQpfCAMSJ54VqRXdFuwL6woArxXqC_1QKtBXRKK4i9CnQKPMpiST1KbI3rSLcIRowfsw5Aqdo6Og01gGuEUBIRs-k7Phs0Nmn-0DlVHrdQidNJhQsedxxmNFfpfJ2IZKxIAQMCxCOrv4IGgoKCAgBEgT0BY37DAsQne3BCRqgAQokChFldXJvcGVhbiBzdGFybGluZ9qliPYDCwoJL20vMDFsMzdxCiIKEGV1cm9wZWFuIHN3YWxsb3fapYj2AwoKCC9tLzBoaHRxChwKCWJsYWNrYmlyZNqliPYDCwoJL20vMDE5N213ChcKBWZpbmNo2qWI9gMKCggvbS8wMzM2aAodCgt3YXRlciBvdXplbNqliPYDCgoIL20vMGs1emsM&fir=aoambbLiNLZLvM%3A%2Cugxla-RCpe6fyM%2C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kQtCMDyamcXZcOhHDRacXsu_kQfOg&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjJ4onNk5zjAhUjUBUIHfS0CLwQ9QEwAnoECAEQBA#imgrc=aoambbLiNLZLvM:&vet=1

Where it shows a joint attribution Robin Lee/BTO

You had best reach out to them and find our what they have to say if you have never licensed that image to anyone let alone the BTO???
Click to expand...

According to Flickr,

All Rights Reserved

You, the copyright holder, reserve all rights provided by copyright law, such as the right to make copies, distribute your work, perform your work, license, or otherwise exploit your work; no rights are waived under this license.

Although the link shows BTO/RobinLee but it does not attribute to where the source is, and also the image used on BTO website was in fact, altered, these are without my knowledge.
 
robinsslee said:
According to Flickr,

All Rights Reserved

You, the copyright holder, reserve all rights provided by copyright law, such as the right to make copies, distribute your work, perform your work, license, or otherwise exploit your work; no rights are waived under this license.

Although the link shows BTO/RobinLee but it does not attribute to where the source is, and also the image used on BTO website was in fact, altered, these are without my knowledge.
Click to expand...
robinsslee said:
That's good information, thanks :)
Click to expand...
robinsslee said:
Facebook :shifty:
View attachment 249101
Click to expand...


Methinks you need to have some strong words with someone there..........and see what happens???

PS a charity having a turnover of millions does not necessarily mean they have a lot of money in disposable terms. There must be somewhere they publish their accounts if you wanted to check the details?
 
Last edited:
Agree with all the above requesting payment.
They have ripped your image, edited it, not named you as source & then published it.
Then YOU are just going to say 'what' ? Keep it !
No thats not how it works.
If an unknown person had borrowed your car for the weekend & then returned it on monday its STILL THEFT !!!!!!!!
Just because they are a charity doesn't mean that its still not THEFT.

This is caused by lazy people NOT prepared to pay the going rate for images..

Request a payment of £200 as a min - & be a little flexible.
 
From what little I know of the BTO, it's a non-profit whose remit is information exchange and consolidation, and the promotion of understanding.

Things change & I could easily be out of date, but my take on it as an organisation was that it had a serious focus (purely to do with study), whereas the rspb's target audience was more populist, though they own and operate reserves, so have more property and staff, & perhaps need more funding as a result.

So if you see my slant, you might relax a bit on your allowable moral outrage, and just give them some leeway. And quite possibly it wasn't the organisation itself that 'stole' your image, but the company that designed their website - such are usually contractors rather than in-house.

But the basic ethic is that they should have asked first, and that you are owed a credit line accompanying the image used. And, of course, paid your price, which you might've waived in consideration of some of the above.
 
Last edited:
droj said:
From what little I know of the BTO, it's a non-profit whose remit is information exchange and consolidation, and the promotion of understanding.

Things change & I could easily be out of date, but my take on it as an organisation was that it had a serious focus (purely to do with study), whereas the rspb's target audience was more populist, though they own and operate reserves, so have more property and staff, & perhaps need more funding as a result.

So if you see my slant, you might relax a bit on your allowable moral outrage, and just give them some leeway. And quite possibly it wasn't the organisation itself that 'stole' your image, but the company that designed their website - such are usually contractors rather than in-house.

But the basic ethic is that they should have asked first, and that you are owed a credit line accompanying the image used. And, of course, paid your price, which you might've waived in consideration of some of the above.
Click to expand...


Yes they are it seems a Not for Profit

Accounts and annual report downloadable here
https://www.bto.org/about-bto/governance
 
Diving Pete said:
>< snip
If an unknown person had borrowed your car for the weekend & then returned it on monday its STILL THEFT !!!!!!!!
><Snip .
Click to expand...
IANAL but I don't think that is theft as the unknown person evidently didn’t deprive the owner — I think it’s TDA.Also the cuckoo photo wasn’t stolen the OP still possesses it, it’s copyright infringement and doesn’t really help to call it theft ;)
 
I use pixys .com for image theft ,they are also now in collaboration with Flickr .. they do take 50% of a payout but that’s better than zero .year before last I had around 2.5k in settlements for image theft so it does work .. and got a few going through at the moment to .
You would be surprised the extent of image theft and it seems the bigger they are the more they think they can get away with it . One of my biggest pay outs was from a international travel company .
 
the black fox said:
I use pixys .com for image theft ,they are also now in collaboration with Flickr .. they do take 50% of a payout but that’s better than zero .year before last I had around 2.5k in settlements for image theft so it does work .. and got a few going through at the moment to .
You would be surprised the extent of image theft and it seems the bigger they are the more they think they can get away with it . One of my biggest pay outs was from a international travel company .
Click to expand...

Thanks for the input, I'll some research on this tomorrow.
 
Is Chris Packham still the president of the BTO?

As a fellow photographer he might be interested in this.
 
droj said:
Who are, by default and wholly in their dna, commercial rats. A bit unlike the present circumstance.
Click to expand...
Theft is theft no matter how big or small .. my gear costs money so why should someone else profit from my work , when Stromboli erupted earlier this week a local lady videoed it , looking on Twitter she was inundated by news agencies from around the world asking to use her videos with the superb offer of we will credit the images to you ,not one of the bastards offered to pay and that includes, the bbc,skynews , etc etc and one company even drew up a contract demanding sole rights which was legal once she said yes .
 
Firstly, screenshot everything for evidence before you even approach BTO.

Secondly email them and ask them for details of the licence they have to use your image on their website and social media channels claiming joint credit.

When they state that they don't have a licence request damages from them as follows:

Base licence rate £100 for one year website and social media use.

x2 for flagrant infringement (their terms and conditions indicate knowledge of copyright)
x2 for incorrect credit (false attribution)
x2 for editing and poor page placement, use as a background image (derogatory treatment of work).

Total: £400

Damages reduced to £300 for settlement within 30 days.

NOTE: This is a request for damages NOT an invoice. Make sure you title it as such.
 
the black fox said:
Theft is theft no matter how big or small .. my gear costs money so why should someone else profit from my work , when Stromboli erupted earlier this week a local lady videoed it , looking on Twitter she was inundated by news agencies from around the world asking to use her videos with the superb offer of we will credit the images to you ,not one of the bastards offered to pay and that includes, the bbc,skynews , etc etc and one company even drew up a contract demanding sole rights which was legal once she said yes .
Click to expand...


It's not theft, it's infringement. Use the correct terminology.
 
All admirable stuff, but perspective remains important. Let's not be tinpot Hitlers in the wrong context.
 
Last edited:
DemiLion said:
Firstly, screenshot everything for evidence before you even approach BTO.

Secondly email them and ask them for details of the licence they have to use your image on their website and social media channels claiming joint credit.

When they state that they don't have a licence request damages from them as follows:

Base licence rate £100 for one year website and social media use.

x2 for flagrant infringement (their terms and conditions indicate knowledge of copyright)
x2 for incorrect credit (false attribution)
x2 for editing and poor page placement, use as a background image (derogatory treatment of work).

Total: £400

Damages reduced to £300 for settlement within 30 days.

NOTE: This is a request for damages NOT an invoice. Make sure you title it as such.
Click to expand...

Exactly. OP this is the answer you really need to follow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top