Photo stolen for website. Advice on legal language please.

J

Jack Field

Messages
127
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
No
Just found that one of my photos from airliners.net is being used on the website of the company who own the aircraft, to promote their business.
I'm going to shoot an invoice off to them and would like like to quote copyright laws relating to the fact that they have nicked my image, without my consent, for commercial purposes.
Anyone tell me the relevant laws to quote?
Thanks.
Rob
 
Firstly, get a screen grab!

I don't think you really need to quote any laws as they will know they have used it. Just bill them for usage and 1 hour of your time for work pertaining to their unauthourised usage.

They'll pay up.

If they don't pay upm bill them again but next time bill for 2 hours time.

etc etc
 
I'd leave legalese to the lawyers. You own the image and they owe you some money. I would decide whether you want to invoice them for usage or whether you're willing to sue them for breach of copyright. Both are distinct paths forward, and they're mutually exclusive. That is to say that you can't expect them to pay for usage if you're threatening to sue them for not paying for usage.

My recommendation is to approach it simply. They're using your image, for which a fee is due. That fee can be whatever you deem is your fee for image usage - make it reasonable and proportionate. Invoice them for use of 1 copyrighted image at £x(/annum renewable?) for web use. If they're using it, or intending to use it, in their brochure then that's a different item on the invoice. You can advise them of that fee with your covering letter.

If they don't like the fee (perhaps it's more than they'd normally expect to pay?) then there's a pretty compelling argument for asking permission and negotiating a fee before breaching copyright. That'll become clear if they pay, or refuse to pay, the fee you're asking.

If they refuse to cough up, then go down the legal route. I wouldn't make legalistic noises from the get-go, though. Treat it as a routine invoice for a routine service. Give them every opportunity to make good and save face.

I would definitely store a copy of their webpage using your image ASAP, though. Use something like http://www.webcitation.org/. It's important that they can't hide the truth of their breach of your copyright by simply editing the evidence out of their website.
 
Okay. Basic invoice sent to the company and the webpage has been archived with WebCite and I've done a screen grab.
Now sit and wait to see if the payment is made in the next 30 days.
 
I might have been tempted to get some printed material from them, to see if they've used it elsewhere.

How did you find the image?
 
Blimey. Just found 3 more photos from airliners.net of mine, all used to promote company services. Two in Czech republic (don't think the invoice will have much effect), and another one in Essex. Invoices gone.
I used one of the online image search providers ?scr-img. Brilliant.
 
Jack Field said:
Blimey. Just found 3 more photos from airliners.net of mine, all used to promote company services. Two in Czech republic (don't think the invoice will have much effect), and another one in Essex. Invoices gone.
I used one of the online image search providers ?scr-img. Brilliant.
Click to expand...

Depends if the Czech company has a presence in the UK. So if you could use Small Claims Court against all if needs be.
Using open legal threats for breach of copyright they'll just tie you up in knots and you won't be able to compete with them on that.
I've been victim to that scenario as well - normally when you bring it to their attention they cough!!
Good luck
 
Yes I've gone down the 'polite' path. Always think it's the best way to start.
I found the images using src-img bookmarklet, that interfaces with Google Image Search. Really good at finding copied images.
 
Just had the first response. Company says the web design company who built the site are no longer trading and the photo has now been removed (which it has, I checked).
Should I still pursue this, as I have a screen grab with the photos on the site?
 
keep all records of communications between you and the other party(s) along with a date & time stamp or record of the times, just in case it comes to payment for the amount of time they had use of the image(s)
 
Jack Field said:
Just had the first response. Company says the web design company who built the site are no longer trading and the photo has now been removed (which it has, I checked).
Should I still pursue this, as I have a screen grab with the photos on the site?
Click to expand...

Yeah you should last time I checked it's the company that is responsible for ensuring that they have the right to use the photo, not the mention that all a.net photo's have a copyright strip and most are watermarked (y) it was there website and they're responsible for payment (y)
 
I agree with Matthew, none of what they say is relevant to the matter at hand. They've reaped the benefit of your imagery, now it's time to pay the piper.

[edit] how old is the photo? Have a look on the wayback machine (http://archive.org/web/web.php) to see if you can figure out when they started using the image.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So someone capable of updated their site has removed the images PDQ, whether it is they or their new web designers both should have checked that all the information on the site was properly obtained and kosher
Dave
 
Jack Field said:
Should I still pursue this, as I have a screen grab with the photos on the site?
Click to expand...

100% yes! I would be embarresed to stop now because of that reply ..stick to your guns!
 
So what do you think. Here is their reply;

''After taking advice today I’ve been informed that although you are permitted to take photographs from a public area for your own use, in order to sell those images commercially you need ‘property release’ from the owner of the aircraft or a nominated body (ie us). As you have not received permission you do not have the right to sell the images so therefore the invoice does not stand. If you have already sold the image to any other parties, or images of any other aircraft operated by our company can you please let me know immediately.''

In other words, do I need a property release to take pictures of an aircraft that belongs to them, in order to charge them a fee to use it. Getting complicated now.
 
No you don't, if you we're stood on public land to take the photo as far as I understand it and it still doesn't excuse there using of the image, I'd be tempted to respond with the fact that you are perusing for breach of copyright not the use of the image as you had no intention of using it commercially ;) see what they said to that
 
Property Releases are mostly an American thing. Did you take the photo in the UK or the US?
 
SimonH said:
Property Releases are mostly an American thing. Did you take the photo in the UK or the US?
Click to expand...

This^

However there's no legal statute there, but several large companies are levering it towards case law with bullying tactics. This could be the beginnings of a UK version.
 
Jack Field said:
So what do you think. Here is their reply;

''After taking advice today I’ve been informed that although you are permitted to take photographs from a public area for your own use, in order to sell those images commercially you need ‘property release’ from the owner of the aircraft or a nominated body (ie us). As you have not received permission you do not have the right to sell the images so therefore the invoice does not stand. If you have already sold the image to any other parties, or images of any other aircraft operated by our company can you please let me know immediately.''

In other words, do I need a property release to take pictures of an aircraft that belongs to them, in order to charge them a fee to use it. Getting complicated now.
Click to expand...

Suggest that they consult a proper IP lawyer rather than their Company Secretary. That legal advice is wrong.

They are attempting to obfuscate. Stick to your guns and follow the breach of copyright.
 
The company has apparently opted to try to play hardball. IMO, they've received some poor advice given the circumstances.

Don't lose sight of the fact that, even IF the Property Release line were valid (and I really DON'T think it is), this does not mean that they can grant themselves the right to use your image without permission. The breach of your copyright is clear, and is well-defined in law. Their angle REALLY isn't.

And now, arguably, you have correspondence that amounts to evidence of a determination on their part to blag their way out of paying you for the use of your image. It can no longer be argued that it was accidental, because the evidence is that it's purposeful.
 
Been pondering this. I would write back:

In answer to your question, whether I have sold any other images of aircraft belonging to your company, the answer is: No. However, I recently discovered that a company had breached copyright of one of my images and used it on their company website to promote their product without securing the appropriate permission or negotiating an appropriate fee for doing so. I did offer that company the opportunity to make good of their illegal activity by providing them with an invoice for use thereof, which they could settle, thereby legitimising their use of the copyrighted image.

Unfortunately it seems that the company has chosen not to avail itself of the generous offer I made, citing - as an excuse and exemption - a purported law which I believe is in reality not even in statute in the UK (and which the company itself would have effectively waived by its very use of the image anyway) and so it seems likely that I will be forced to avail myself of the recently-improved copyright law designed to protect UK photographers from unscrupulous evaders of UK copyright law, and sue for punitive damages. I'm sure you agree that any breach of copyright is egregious, and that everything that can be done to discourage this illegal act should be done as a matter of principle.

Sincerely,
Click to expand...
 
SimonH said:
Been pondering this. I would write back:

In answer to your question, whether I have sold any other images of aircraft belonging to your company, the answer is: No. However, I recently discovered that a company had breached copyright of one of my images and used it on their company website to promote their product without securing the appropriate permission or negotiating an appropriate fee for doing so. I did offer that company the opportunity to make good of their illegal activity by providing them with an invoice for use thereof, which they could settle, thereby legitimising their use of the copyrighted image.

Unfortunately it seems that the company has chosen not to avail itself of the generous offer I made, citing - as an excuse and exemption - a purported law which I believe is in reality not even in statute in the UK (and which the company itself would have effectively waived by its very use of the image anyway) and so it seems likely that I will be forced to avail myself of the recently-improved copyright law designed to protect UK photographers from unscrupulous evaders of UK copyright law, and sue for punitive damages. I'm sure you agree that any breach of copyright is egregious, and that everything that can be done to discourage this illegal act should be done as a matter of principle.

Sincerely,
Click to expand...

Or in short
Pay up ya thieving scumbags
Click to expand...
 
SimonH said:
Been pondering this. I would write back:

In answer to your question, whether I have sold any other images of aircraft belonging to your company, the answer is: No. However, I recently discovered that a company had breached copyright of one of my images and used it on their company website to promote their product without securing the appropriate permission or negotiating an appropriate fee for doing so. I did offer that company the opportunity to make good of their illegal activity by providing them with an invoice for use thereof, which they could settle, thereby legitimising their use of the copyrighted image.

Unfortunately it seems that the company has chosen not to avail itself of the generous offer I made, citing - as an excuse and exemption - a purported law which I believe is in reality not even in statute in the UK (and which the company itself would have effectively waived by its very use of the image anyway) and so it seems likely that I will be forced to avail myself of the recently-improved copyright law designed to protect UK photographers from unscrupulous evaders of UK copyright law, and sue for punitive damages. I'm sure you agree that any breach of copyright is egregious, and that everything that can be done to discourage this illegal act should be done as a matter of principle.

Sincerely,
Click to expand...

No, it sounds facetious. Stick to a polite but more insistent form. Ask who it was they received their advice from, point out that the advice is erroneous and why, then once again insist on payment for use of your work.
 
It's intended to be facetious. The company's position is untenable, and they need to be made to realise how ridiculous their argument is.

So you take some headshots for a company. You make the images available to them and they use them in their company brochure. You invoice them as normal, but they refuse to pay on the grounds that you didn't obtain model release forms for the images they've proceeded to use. I'd love to see any client try and make that stick. The ultimate get-anything-for-free-by-cheating clause.
 
SimonH said:
It's intended to be facetious. The company's position is untenable, and they need to be made to realise how ridiculous their argument is.
Click to expand...

The quickest way to lose a legal case is to come across as a smarta se. You deal with it coldly, clinically, efficiently but more important, factually and accurately.

The real answer, when it comes to this level of case, is that you should turn immediately to an IP specialist and not queer their pitch by send stupid letters.
 
Mark has it, if for any reason your claim ever comes to court it would be thrown out if your communication with the company is of that nature.
You need to remember that you're dealing with someone who might be trying to wind you up or bully you into withdrawing, on the other hand it might just be some 9 to 5 flunky following a script. Keep it impersonal and professional if you want any chance of getting paid.
 
Some great advice. Thanks all very much. I'm going to keep it as business like and polite as I can, but I will be pursuing it.
 
The thing you have to be prepared for when threatening legal action is to actually carry it out...

Most (big) companies I've ever come across will stick to their guns right up until the morning before the court appearance, then settle then.

Too many chancers and time wasters to settle before that point really...

You might be able to get smack down on a small outfit, but not a big one unless you bring out the big guns.

I doubt if anyone owning a jet is likely to be small fry...
 
Isn't there some kind of trademark protection law - whereby you can't use an image commercially if it has a trademark in it? Could this be what they're indicating?

Does the image even have a logo or company name in it?
 
seriously ..... how much was the invoice for? as you dont sell images where did you get the figure from?

have you got deep pockets and lots of time ?

if you go to court, (big mistake) and end up on the wrong side of the fence it will cost you a fortune, your up against a company with deep pockets all beit crappy legal advice so far, but do you really want a proper legal fight?

its ok for people to suggest you fight it all the way, its not them having to do it.

at the end of the day you have lost Nothing, they have removed the image, which should have been your first request incidently.

so get a watermark that works and move on.

an get some proper legal advice, sending correspondence as per your example, just gives the impression you have no idea about what your doing, and the forum whilest great advice is no substitute for professional advice, just be warned a solicitor will always say fight, as they get paid regardless, even if its just a 200 quid letter.
 
Last edited:
Studi0488 said:
seriously ..... how much was the invoice for? as you dont sell images where did you get the figure from?

have you got deep pockets and lots of time ?

if you go to court, (big mistake) and end up on the wrong side of the fence it will cost you a fortune, your up against a company with deep pockets all beit crappy legal advice so far, but do you really want a proper legal fight?

its ok for people to suggest you fight it all the way, its not them having to do it.

at the end of the day you have lost Nothing, they have removed the image, which should have been your first request incidently.

so get a watermark that works and move on.

an get some proper legal advice, sending correspondence as per your example, just gives the impression you have no idea about what your doing, and the forum whilest great advice is no substitute for professional advice, just be warned a solicitor will always say fight, as they get paid regardless, even if its just a 200 quid letter.
Click to expand...

Can I suggest that if you don't understand how to rectify breach of copyright you refrain from handing out advice?

I'm amazed that a so-called commercial photographer takes such a casual approach to this.

The only thing that's accurate in the above post is the recommendation to get proper legal representation.
 
DemiLion said:
Can I suggest that if you don't understand how to rectify breach of copyright you refrain from handing out advice?

I'm amazed that a so-called commercial photographer takes such a casual approach to this.

The only thing that's accurate in the above post is the recommendation to get proper legal representation.
Click to expand...

You will have to explain your comments? I fully understand copyright

And as for insinuating we are not commercial photographers, what's all that about?

If 8 staff, 250+k turnover, our own (not rented) 6500sq feet fully equipped studio, some of the biggest clients in the uk, is a "so called" commercial photography business then I can't wait until Eric are a proper one.
 
Last edited:
OutLore said:
Isn't there some kind of trademark protection law - whereby you can't use an image commercially if it has a trademark in it? Could this be what they're indicating?

Does the image even have a logo or company name in it?
Click to expand...

No there isn't.
 
Unless the OP is seeking damages in the £many thousands, the appropriate way forward is probably small claims court. I agree absolutely that if, as appears to be the case, the company has no intention to settle and leaves Jack with the option to either sue or drop the matter, the next stop should be a consultation with an expert in this field - see an IP professional/lawyer.

That doesn't mean we can't discuss what we think he should do, or what we imagine we'd decide to do in his situation. It doesn't mean the discussion is pointless or moot. It also doesn't mean that we all think we're experts, or that we'd pretend to know more than we do or that we think Rob should automatically take any of our advice over any other non-expert. But on the basis of us all being fellow photographers, all potentially at risk of suffering the same affront as Rob has, this discussion and our exploration of this issue is valid and it is worthwhile.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SimonH said:
Unless the OP is seeking damages in the £many thousands, the appropriate way forward is probably small claims court. I agree absolutely that if, as appears to be the case, the company has no intention to settle and leaves Jack with the option to either sue or drop the matter, the next stop should be a consultation with an expert in this field - see an IP professional/lawyer.

That doesn't mean we can't discuss what we think he should do, or what we imagine we'd decide to do in his situation. It doesn't mean the discussion is pointless or moot. It also doesn't mean that we all think we're experts, or that we'd pretend to know more than we do or that we think Rob should automatically take any of our advice over any other non-expert. But on the basis of us all being fellow photographers, all potentially at risk of suffering the same affront as Rob has, this discussion and our exploration of this issue is valid and it is worthwhile.
Click to expand...

Don't you mean the patents county court?

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/hargreaves-enforce-c4e-pcc.pdf
 
Last edited:
SimonH said:
Yeah, whatever. It's described as the "small claims track", as the lawyer Rob speaks to will clarify.
Click to expand...

My post wasn't meant to be derogatory, it's because confusion over the invoice situation, the op could have thought that he should go to small claims court, to recover the debt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top