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?