reaction


YourResponse... I


Neil McAllister, Stockport


read Helen Nugent’s article, Shocks from the Past (September/ October) with interest, as I have considerable


personal experience of library images being used without payment. She is shocked to be presented with a considerable fee, presumably by Alamy, for an unpaid use. As Simon Chapman suggests, unpaid usage is a considerable problem for photographers and certainly is for me. In recent months, I was alerted to


two such uses, one by a county councillor who ‘borrowed’ an image of his constituency as a background for a TV interview. Despite being a member of the finance committee, he forgot to pay for the image, which was displayed to regional television viewers complete with copyright watermark. In another case, like Helen Nugent, someone handling regional publicity was presented with a substantial bill for using an image of a pretty canalside pub. She had been passed the image by the current pub owner, who had been given it by the previous owner. Part of the problem lies with


previous library practice of allowing full resolution, unwatermarked images to be downloaded and relying on users to be honest and accurately report and pay for uses. Less than scrupulous or absent-minded users forgetting do this, or people like the former pub owner retaining pictures, results in either ’orphaned’ images or unpaid use. During an idle moment (I seem to


have more of those these days), I spent a few hours searching the internet for such infringements, discovering more than 10 credited with my name or pseudonyms, some going back a number of years. One was so blatant it retained the Alamy watermark but was on a personal website in India so unlikely to yield payment. The most blatant was on the website of a


national tourist board online magazine. All were referred to Alamy and passed on to their outsourced attack dogs to recover payment. The article raises two vital points. First, is the recovery ‘heavy handed’? In some cases, a light touch can be applied when a publication is a known library customer – some may use hundreds of images a month – when non-payment is a reporting fault. When the usage is out of the blue and no attempt has been made to determine the source, then some sort of penalty should apply. I know the large fees demanded can be seen as a fine. They are not – they represent payment to the agency chasing the debt, the library and, at the bottom of the pile, the creator – which leads to the second point. The £800 demanded, which ‘put the fear of God’, into the author is not outrageous. Indeed, unlicensed publication can lead to a far larger loss to the photographer. Last month, a library licensed an image of mine exclusively for a book cover for a four-figure sum. Had that image been used elsewhere, that sale would have been impossible.


I am approaching life membership time and have seen my photographic income dwindle from allowing me to live comfortably to the current situation where making a living is almost impossible. In 2008, my picture library sales averaged $129 each; in 2023, the average was $28.65 because of less commission. Lest any reader thinks that four- figure sales are the norm, my first seven days of October sales (from 60,000+ pictures on sale) total $1.77 – less Alamy’s 60 per cent commission, leaving me with 71 cents or 54 of your fine British pence. I would be off to the pub to celebrate, but it has closed – unprofitable apparently. I know the feeling.


Images by Neil McAllister


Top: Bhutan, Paro Festival (Tsechu), Dance of the three kinds of Ging (Gyinging), monastic dancers


Middle: Ethiopia, Amhara Region, Highlands, Simien Mountains National Park, dramatic landscape near Chennek Camp on trek


Bottom: Madagascar, Betsileo famadihana ceremony, ‘turning of the bones’, bodies carried from tomb


We welcome comments on issues raised by the magazine and anything else you want to comment on. Email at journalist@nuj.org.uk


theJournalist | 25


MA G A ZINE OF THE NA TIONAL UNION OF JOURNALIST S


WWW.NUJ.ORG.UK | SEPT-OCT 2024


Smash and grab Or valid copyright enforcement?


TUC BEST UNION JOURNAL OF THE YE AR


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28