Free images for use on (someone elses's) blog?

jerry12953

jerry12953

Suspended / Banned
Messages
12,421
Name
Jeremy Moore
Edit My Images
No
Someone is reviewing my most recent book on their blog. The book came out 2.5 years ago so the publisher referred him to me for the photographs, and after perusing another of his (photo) book reviews I decided not to let him have them. I've now seen the review and it's..... well, er.......mixed.

I can't make up my mind what to do. I don't think he has a great readership and anyway, why should I give him my images so that he can be critical about (some of) them?

Or am I being a miserable old do-and-so?
 
If you've made the images public (i.e. via a book) then I don't think there's much you can do.

He's allowed to reproduce the works for critique.
 
true , but if you don't he'll just scan them out of the book and they'll look crap thus giving the impression that his critique is justified
 
If he's scanned the images and reproduced them to critique, he's legally obliged to declare that.
Just because an image has been published in a book, that does not place it in the public realm for reproduction without permission from the copyright holder.
 
viv1969 said:
If he's scanned the images and reproduced them to critique, he's legally obliged to declare that.
Just because an image has been published in a book, that does not place it in the public realm for reproduction without permission from the copyright holder.
Click to expand...

From what I understand he may legally use the images for review purposes, and it is a genuine review (I've seen it), although the book is 2.5 years old. I don't think he intends to scan the book to get the pictures either, (AFAIK); it's just that he has strong opinions and they are not necessarily positive ones about my work.

So am I being a miserable old git by not allowing him to use them?
 
If he has a negative opinion of the images that you disagree with the best defense you can make for your images is to have them displayed along with his comments so others can make their own mind up.
On the other hand if he has a small readership is it even worth the bother?
 
Barrysprout said:
If he has a negative opinion of the images that you disagree with the best defense you can make for your images is to have them displayed along with his comments so others can make their own mind up.
On the other hand if he has a small readership is it even worth the bother?
Click to expand...

Good point, thanks.
 
Negative reviews aren't always damaging, 5-start and 1-star reviews both indicate that your work created a reaction.. it's the "meh" 3-star reviews that suggest pedestrian and unengaging work. Even a bad review will create interest amongst those interested in the topics/themes that the reviewer dislikes.

I've found the review that Tim Parkin wrote on your book, and just his comment at the end about your afterward noting psychgeography and "urban wanderer as author" has made me bookmark your website to return to later. I suspect our bookshelves have several titles in common (Psychogeography by Coverley, Edgelands by Farley and Roberts, The Unofficial Countryside by Mabey, etc.)
 
Alastair said:
Negative reviews aren't always damaging, 5-start and 1-star reviews both indicate that your work created a reaction.. it's the "meh" 3-star reviews that suggest pedestrian and unengaging work. Even a bad review will create interest amongst those interested in the topics/themes that the reviewer dislikes.

I've found the review that Tim Parkin wrote on your book, and just his comment at the end about your afterward noting psychgeography and "urban wanderer as author" has made me bookmark your website to return to later. I suspect our bookshelves have several titles in common (Psychogeography by Coverley, Edgelands by Farley and Roberts, The Unofficial Countryside by Mabey, etc.)
Click to expand...


Yes indeed! I have all those. While I was working on this particular book I got far more interested in the built environment of the coast than the "natural" coastline. The reviewer is critical in that more of those photographs didn't appear in the book, but as I said to him publishers need to sell books! When I exhibited the photographs it was a different selection because it was aimed at a different audience. I think it would have satisfied him much more.

Many thanks for your comments, Alastair.

PS Do I know you from Onlandscape?
 
From the 'Exceptions to copyright' section of the Intellectual Property Office website (https://www.gov.uk/exceptions-to-copyright)

"Criticism, review and reporting current events
Fair dealing for criticism, review or quotation is allowed for any type of copyright work. Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of reporting current events is allowed for any type of copyright work other than a photograph). In each of these cases, a sufficient acknowledgment will be required.

As stated, a photograph cannot be reproduced for the purpose of reporting current events. The intention of the law is to prevent newspapers or magazines reproducing photographs for reporting current events which have appeared in competitor’s publications."

As your work isn't reporting current events, I would think that he's able to use your images in a review, whether you give him permission or not, as long as he acknowledges you as the owner of the works.
 
Last edited:
jerry12953 said:
PS Do I know you from Onlandscape?
Click to expand...
No, I just did some Google-Fu around your name and book titles to see if I could find the recent review. I think I came across On Landscape a while ago, but I don't really need another subscription-based publication at the moment!

If there's a review that criticises the content of the book vs. the content of the exhibition, then there's a positive spin that can be put on this when it comes to curating the next book and talking the publishers into a braver stance. Such a review is fundamentally saying they like your work and just aren't keen on the subset the publishers have selected. That's a positive review in your favour.
 
viv1969 said:
If he's scanned the images and reproduced them to critique, he's legally obliged to declare that.
Just because an image has been published in a book, that does not place it in the public realm for reproduction without permission from the copyright holder.
Click to expand...

It does for Fair Dealing including criticism.
 
st599 said:
It does for Fair Dealing including criticism.
Click to expand...

I think st599 is correct here.......

This isn't really a copyright issue for me, it's a "how generous should I be" issue.......

I think it'll sort itself out after time. He's willing to give me the right to reply. So I guess that way I can put my side of the story as well.
 
viv1969 said:
If he's scanned the images and reproduced them to critique, he's legally obliged to declare that.
Just because an image has been published in a book, that does not place it in the public realm for reproduction without permission from the copyright holder.
Click to expand...


Actually... it does, so long as the work is credited with a 'significant acknowledgement'. A review article on his book.. well, in itself is a significant acknowledgement. If anyone wants to review your work that has been released for public consumption, then it's fair game.

@jerry12953 I read the review... it's not bad at all. Why did you not wish to co-operate? You may have been able to take more editorial control over the images used if you co-operated.
 
Pookeyhead said:
@jerry12953 I read the review... it's not bad at all. Why did you not wish to co-operate? You may have been able to take more editorial control over the images used if you co-operated.
Click to expand...

I'm puzzled. As far as I'm aware it hasn't been posted yet........

It definitely hasn't. You must be looking at a different review.

But on reviews generally, in my experience reviewers tend to have their own agenda and I've been stung by such people before. When it is possible to have some control I would prefer to have it.

This guy has done a hatchet job on another book of photographs. He may have been right but it's not the done thing, is it? Boring or mediocre books normally just don't get reviewed in my experience.

By being difficult I have seen this review; it has factual inaccuracies in it and it is about 50/50. But by my exercising control over the photographs the reviewer has given me a "right to reply". So I think I can benefit from it, on balance.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top