This debate raises a far wider issue. There are some ecclesiastical institutions (no names here!) which claim copyright of images of items of their fabric - I am particularly thinking of stained glass since that is the area I am most familiar with. As I understand it copyright of a photograph is vested in the photographer unless they have specifically ceded that copyright to another person or body.(The situation may be complicated for reproduction purposes if such ecclesiastical institutions impose a condition on photographers that any photography is for personal use only). But the copyright situation is clear; it is vested in the photographer.

 

With regard to your specific matter, what were the circumstances under which the photograph in question was taken - was it with the knowledge and approval of the body that owns the manuscript, and were any conditions imposed on the photographer about subsequent use or dissemination of the image?

 

 

Gordon Plumb