I have had books published and articles in journals and each time I've had work published I have been asked to supply details of copyright for each image I use. As the photographer, you own copyright irrespective of whether your website had any copyright statement and credit should certainly be attached to that photograph. In the first instance I would suggest you contact the journal, send them a copy of relevant pages from the website and details of when the page 'went live' and say that you have emails in which you have contributed to the research of the journal article and any emails in which the photograph was referred to. You can ask that a correction be printed in a future journal.
From: British archaeology discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Driscoll
Sent: 04 December 2008 17:26
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [BRITARCH] Fw: Copyright abuse?
I may be wrong but I didnt think you needed to speci Maggie and Keith,
I may be wrong but I didnt think you needed to specifically indicate that you reserve the copyright image, the fact that you can demonstrate you are the original author (photographer) should be enough. I believe under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act that photographs are your property under copyright terms and use of them without your permission is breaking the law, but I am sure someone can clarify that better than I. That said a grey area here may be that someone could have stood in the very same position and taken the same shot making it look like your image. If however, you believe it is your image you would have cause for complaint. In the future, if you are still worried about this, modern graphics programs (such as Paintshop Pro or Photoshop) allow you to put a watermark across the image with your names on it. Therefore people can clearly view the image but if they want to reproduce it the text would be laid across it. They would then have to approach you directly for a license. Only quite nifty digital manipulation will be able to remove it but in general this will affect the qaulity of the picture as well.
If someone could clarify the copyright issue or correct me that would be helpful.
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Nick.Thorpe <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, 4 December, 2008 17:13:47
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] Copyright abuse?
Dear Maggie and Keith,
If an image you took was used without permission, then, provided that it is clear from your website that you reserved the copyright of the image, I would suggest that you should contact the publishers. However, it is not clear to me how you can be sure that it is your photograph, i.e. why can't someone else have photographed the same thing?
The only recent publication I know of relating to the art is the article by Nash and Stanford in Rock Art Research, which does credit you with the discovery and refers to a team from Bristol undertaking tracings and digital photography in 2006. Has a briefer version of this perhaps been published elsewhere, which has omitted part of the original text?
From: British archaeology discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maggie & Keith Davison
Sent: 04 December 2008 16:26
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [BRITARCH] Copyright abuse?
Some years ago we made a small but important discovery of previously unknown rock art at the Barclodiad y Gawres passage grave on Anglesey. We put detailed photos of the newly found art on our website along with an acoount of its discovery. We were thrilled to find that this was one area where keen amateurs can still make a contribution.
Four years later, an academic team also noticed the art at the site, and then discovered our coverage of it on the web. We had 'phone and email discussions with the team at the time, and they mentioned us as discoverers of the art in their initial press releases.
The team have recently published an account of the new rock art in an academic journal, the only photograph of the new art contained in their paper has been taken from our website and used without permission. The caption for the photograph specifically credits it to one of the paper's authors.
Recognition or our initial discovery, photography, and web publication of the art some four years prior to theirs is limited to an unattributed "first recognised in 2001".
As amateurs, perhaps we should not expect to be named in the paper as the discoverers of the art, but to publish our original discovery photo without permission, and then to claim it as their own is surely wrong in anyone's reckoning.
In the past, people have illegally used photos from our website and represented them as their own web content. We know how to deal with this and it can be easily corrected by removal of the offending images.
This situation is different, our work is now irretrievably recorded in the literature as someone else's.
We are a little out of our depth here, and hope that list members who may have seen similar situations in academic publishing may be able to advise us about how best to approach the problem.
Is there a recognised procedure for dealing with situations like this?
Maggie & Keith Davison
Registered to vote yet? Easy as 1 2 3...
All city households need to register to vote this year and every year - call us on 0115 9154938
This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content
and cleared by NetIQ MailMarshal.
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may
contain personal views which are not the views of
Nottingham City Council unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from
your system, do not use, copy or disclose the information
in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender
immediately. Please note that Nottingham City Council
monitors e-mails sent or received for the purposes of
ensuring compliance with its policies and procedures.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.
The contents of e-mails sent or received may have to be
disclosed if a relevant request is made under current
legislation, such as, but not limited to, the Data Protection
Act 1998 and the Freedom of Information Act 2000