Advice Copyright and another photography run-in

[old.user4556]

Le sigh.

So I took my camera to an Ice Hockey game recently and snapped an image inside the arena using an ultra wide angle lens of a sell-out crowd (~4000 people). The image itself is very good and I shared it on social media to show how our local team has grown from around fuck-all people to filling the whole arena. The Ice Hockey club, to put it bluntly, stole my image and started using it in some of their promotional material in addition to sharing it with other Ice Hockey social media streams (the resolution is too low for anything else, thankfully). At this point, I took umbrage of this and contacted a couple of those outlets to understand who gave the permission to use the image. I got an email back this morning stating that since the image was taken inside the arena that the club owned the copyright and they'll do as they wish, which I'm pretty sure is bollocks.

My knowledge of UK copyright law, which I Googled this morning to check, is that since I took the image, I am automatically the copyright owner of that image regardless of where / how / what. The pitfalls seem to be that if I wanted to sell my photo which may contain logos etc., then that's when it becomes a legal minefield considering that the image was also taken on arguably private property.

Any thoughts or debates on this freddies? I suppose @Tom does this work from a video point of view so is likely to be closer to the Ts & Cs of this sort of thing.

 

[Hawkwind]

Your initial Googled check is the same as my understanding. You own the picture and they need your permission to use it.

Who owns copyright in an image? The person who creates an image (“the creator”), such as somebody who takes a photo, will generally be the owner of the original copyright. However, if it was created as part of the creator’s job, the employer will generally own the copyright. A creator can license the work directly themselves. They can also “assign” (transfer) the copyright to another person or allow that other person to license the work on their behalf. Licensing is giving another person or organisation permission to use a work such as an image, often in return for payment and/or on certain conditions.

Taken from the below link:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/305165/c-notice-201401.pdf

So basically the Ice Hokey Club are talking bollocks. The copyright owner is the person taking the photo. Any photos put online usually have a copyright notice to enforce this.

 

[Tom]

They have no right to use your image - none. You are entitled to insist they remove it from anywhere they've published it and you have the force of law on your side.

I suggest that if you make that demand and they ignore it, you send them an invoice for unauthorised use of your intellectual property. As regards the "legal minefield", if the club object on this basis then you should ask them to clarify what licence is required, if public liability insurance is needed, and what actions would qualify you to gain that licence. For instance, to shoot at a premiership football match you need to be a recognised freelancer (photographs published in the press), a club photographer or work for an agency. You can't just walk in and take pictures of the action.

My betting is they'll have no idea what you're talking about, because they'll be a small organisation not used to dealing with such matters. So I suggest you give them two options. 1) they may use your image but under a suitable licence whereby you are to be credited for each use, with a link to whatever url you choose. Or 2), they remove all your images immediately, or you will pursue the matter legally and seek suitable recompense.

Bear in mind they could remove the images and then ban you from their premises, which I presume you don't want. My advice is to go for option 1.

 

[old.user4556]

They have no right to use your image - none. You are entitled to insist they remove it from anywhere they've published it and you have the force of law on your side.

I suggest that if you make that demand and they ignore it, you send them an invoice for unauthorised use of your intellectual property. As regards the "legal minefield", if the club object on this basis then you should ask them to clarify what licence is required, if public liability insurance is needed, and what actions would qualify you to gain that licence. For instance, to shoot at a premiership football match you need to be a recognised freelancer (photographs published in the press), a club photographer or work for an agency. You can't just walk in and take pictures of the action.

My betting is they'll have no idea what you're talking about, because they'll be a small organisation not used to dealing with such matters. So I suggest you give them two options. 1) they may use your image but under a suitable licence whereby you are to be credited for each use, with a link to whatever url you choose. Or 2), they remove all your images immediately, or you will pursue the matter legally.

Bear in mind they could remove the images and then ban you from their premises, which I presume you don't want.

Thanks dude - your last sentence is precisely my concern, it's a small enough organisation that they could simply ban me and I suspect that's the only way for them to "deal" with it.

At least I know I'm correct when it comes to the "who own's the copyright" and their right to use it (which is simply none).

 

[Shagrat]

yeah think Hawkwinds right, its definitely owned by the person taking the photograph, not the venue.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Could also say "Hey, pay me X and it's cool. Fairs fair and all.", then if they tell you to piss off take em out

Just a suggestion.

 

[ECA]

If they used your image for anything you'd consider commercial purposes then lawyer up.
Our business spends about £20-30k/year on copyright stuff with lawyers and we get £100k/year+ from infringement settlements.
It will never ever ever go to court, because any competent lawyer will basically send them a letter noting their infringement with a request for payment of X. ( commercial value ).
They will consult their lawyers and be told it'd cost more to fight it than pay you a nuisance fee ( even if its a legit claim, the tldr is it's not worth them fighting it for that sort of value of claim. )

It might cost you 1-2k in lawyers fees but you can probably get at least £5k depending on how widespread their use of the photo is.

 

[Moriath]

If they used your image for anything you'd consider commercial purposes then lawyer up.
Our business spends about £20-30k/year on copyright stuff with lawyers and we get £100k/year+ from infringement settlements.
It will never ever ever go to court, because any competent lawyer will basically send them a letter noting their infringement with a request for payment of X. ( commercial value ).
They will consult their lawyers and be told it'd cost more to fight it than pay you a nuisance fee ( even if its a legit claim, the tldr is it's not worth them fighting it for that sort of value of claim. )

It might cost you 1-2k in lawyers fees but you can probably get at least £5k depending on how widespread their use of the photo is.

You think that a ice hockey team has five k to pay. I doubt it.

 

[caLLous]

Well they should source imagery they use properly then.

 

[Gwadien]

I can't help but feel that you support this hockey team, and therefore don't wanna sue them.

But I guess you may have some future legal implications if you say 'look dudes, wtf, ask me next time'.

 

[ECA]

You think that a ice hockey team has five k to pay. I doubt it.

If it's a small 5 a side team then sure, if it's a bigger team with professional players/semi professionals - then yes, they will have enough money to make legal action worthwhile.
Without knowing it's hard to say.

 

[Scouse]

Plus - it's @Big G taking them to task. If they infringe on a big-boy then he'll hit 'em straight with big time law action and they'll be fucked...

 

[CorNokZ]

Let's see the picture! Watermark the shit out of it first tho