/ Advice needed - papers used my pictures
This feels like the sort of thing that someone on UKC might have some experience of.
Three years ago, the Mail and Sun newspapers used stills acquired from a video I'd posted on Youtube as part of articles they published in their online editions about an incident that involved me. They had made no attempt to contact me prior to publication. The core of their articles was taken from a Bristol Post article (which I had been contacted about). There were additional photos in the Sun/Mail articles which weren't included in the BP article.
At the time, I chose not to take any action over it for personal reasons. Now however, I'd like more money, and concurrently I'd also like those institutions to have slightly less money. But I don't really know if I have a strong claim or where to start. My questions are broadly:
- Do I have a claim at all? Should they have used stills from my youtube videos without my permission, and can I charge for that?
- Does the length of time that's passed change things? Or my knowledge of the articles at the time?
- Will I have to jump through hoops to get anywhere? Is it worthwhile in terms of effort/potential reward?
Don't waste your time.
People suing for defamation struggle to get a good result.
> People suing for defamation struggle to get a good result.
But it's not suing for deformation, it's asking for recompense for use of media I produced.
Can you honestly afford to take a newspaper to court? I mean how much was this content they stole actually worth?
The point I was trying to make was that trying to get money out of a major media company may be difficult.
Not least because you haven't got a claim: "fair dealing" would likely apply
While your video as a whole is copyrighted, stills from the video may be considered fair use.
I doubt you’ll get anything other than the bum’s rush from the newspapers, they’re pretty good at knowing their legal position
I think you need to have a close look at YouTube terms and conditions to see what rights you have given away by posting it there.
If you still own the copyright and publishing rights, then I suppose your claim would be for use of copyright material without your permission. What fee might be payable for that I couldn't say, but I'd doubt you'd have much of a case for damages, seeing as you published it on YouTube for the whole world to see.
You might find that YouTube has been paid instead of you.....
> The point I was trying to make was that trying to get money out of a major media company may be difficult.
> Not least because you haven't got a claim: "fair dealing" would likely apply
Fair dealing cannot be applied to photos used to report a current event, which would appear to be the case described.
Do you want the cash or to see justice done?
It might be easier to ask that any money you think is owed, is paid to a charity. I don't know what the rates are for using a photo, but I don't suppose it's a life changing amount. Being the season of good will and all that, it could just work.
You're quids in then, even though it's not a photo (technicaly).
Go for it, more power to you. You want to start with a web search for a NWNF solicitor.
As Birdie Num Num says this is covered under "fair dealing" if the stills were used to report a current news event. If they'd been photos you would have a case.
> Fair dealing cannot be applied to photos used to report a current event
You're right, but video stills aren't technically photos.
It probably won't get you anywhere but you can try pinging these guys on Twitter.
There have been quite a few examples lately of the Daily Mail and others asking for permission to use photos from members of the public, having that permission quite explicitly refused, and then using them anyway.
The legal situation is spelled out here.
In practice I think you will have problems making a claim from so long ago. However, it is worth writing to them giving the date, issue and page number (if printed) of the pix, telling them the shots are your copyright and requesting payment at the usual rates.. They will no doubt ignore you so follow up a week or so later with a phone call to the picture desk.
If that fails, and you are willing to push it, try the small claims court. They may pay up just to be rid of the hassle. Demanding big amounts may be counter-productive since the more you ask for the more it is worth resisting the claim.
Otherwise forget it. After all, you did not care at the time and the amounts will be relatively trivial. As has been said above, they have deep pockets and are used to fending off this sort of claim How much of your life are you willing to give over to pursuing it?
Lake District-based runner Kim Collison has set a new speed record on the Bob Graham Round in winter. Kim completed the round in just 15 hours 47 minutes, knocking a big chunk from the previous fastest winter time of 18:18 set by Jim Mann in 2013.