Old Photographs and new web based picture libraries.

[6959]

Many books published in the past several decades used photographs credited to, for example, Great Western Railway, or British Railways. I notice that, when searching the web, some of the well used photographs now come up as Gettyimages or on similar photographic libraries claiming copyright and asking for publication fees.

 

What is the copyright situation with these new libraries if an author uses a previously freely available photograph in a book? Can these new libraries claim publication fees for the same images sourced elsewhere?

 

In the past, I have found the same photograph from various sources all claiming copyright and asking for publication fees. If I had a photograph issued by a long defunct manufacturing company, and copies from other copyright claimants, I acknowledged the original source and ignored the others.

 

It is easy to ignore a one man band selling images they do not own but, since the advent of new anti-piracy laws created to protect large multi-national corporations with powerful legal departments, how do authors protect themselves from claims for publication fees or infringement of copyright?

 

Over the years I have collected many photographs and drawings for books (not financially viable so not yet published) and took the precaution of obtaining the original negative or drawing master if possible, or at least got a letter of consent from the individual who took the photograph, or from the company involved. Many photographers have died and their photographic collections have new owners. The photographs from defunct companies are often abandoned to anyone who fishes them out of the skip on a demolition site or happens to have an old print squirreled away.

[Kenton]

Doesn't this highlight a flaw in the argument for persistent copyright? (where the ownership is sold on)

 

Ownership of the copyright really should die with the owner and be non-transferable. No issue with the photographer making money by selling rights to publish material but see that as purely a licence. My own opinion is that all material should pass into either a public ownership (government/library) on death of the originator. That way a publishing fee could still be obtained and either put to use by the library or to the estate.

 

But copyright law is not exactly known for its clarity.

[jonhall]

I suspect that the originals are in the NRM collection and getty images is acting as an agent on this case, certainly a lot of the images appear to be available through both getty and the science and society website.

 

.

Jon