Shared publicly  - 
 
So the +Birmingham Mail could put the effort in to crop my picture, but not to type an attribution line, or to send me an email asking for permission for use of my photograph on their website? Very much annoyed! I don't mind people using my images - else I wouldn't post them under a #creativecommons  license, but I DO expect them to give proper attribution in return.  Especially if they are a newspaper's picture desk, and the attribution information is listed in the exif data. And even more especially if I dragged a wide-angle lens up a damn mountain in the middle of nowhere after spending an hour and a half carsick in an ancient bus.

My photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/vintagedept/4967899056
Birmingham Mail article: http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/lifestyle/travel/destination-historic-capitol-city-sofia-1313066

So err.. do I send them an invoice? Or what?

(I believe they grabbed the image from wikipedia where it is the 'lead image'. However, also there, the license is clearly mentioned. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boyana_Church . So that's not an excuse. Picture desks should learn that wikipedia does not necessarily equals public domain.) 
22
3
Karl Gookey's profile photoHannes Van De Vreken's profile photoScott Richey's profile photoDavid Morel's profile photo
16 comments
 
+Edo de Roo I did just notice,  the Flickr 'smaller sizes' contain the original exif (and thus licensing) info. So does the wikipedia original.  The wikipedia smaller sizes/derivates, however, lost the exif data. Maybe that is something that could be changed in the future.  Then people stealing pictures no longer have any excuse remaining. (If you open them up in photoshop to crop, there even clearly appears a 'copyright' sign next to the filename.) 
 
Just send them an invoice 
 
+Arvid Bux Any examples lying about per chance? :d 

+Paul Schoonhoven Yeah, that's why I'm annoyed. I can get that the general public does not completely grab copyright law, but a newspaper should. And a believe a full CC license to be quite generous, using a picture then just requires.. some effort. :) 
 
I think I would do the same. Just make it public what the problem is. And ask for advice... ;-) 
 
+Daniel Radu I do feel they owe me some sort of compensation for the time it took me to compose that slide. :d Would love to tell them  that they have two options to choose from:

A. pay £50 licensing costs in my .be bank account for the time there wasn't any attribution (and processing fees are for them)+ put license up, or;
B. do a 1000 word interview with someone from the CC organisation's board of directors, and run it both online and in print.

But not sure how to put that in legalese. 
 
It seems the sources of the other photos in the articles are a bit dodgy too:
* Alexander Nevski Church - From the Learning English blog on the BBC website? http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/learningenglish/2010/06/the-city-where-i-live.shtml
* Sofia Bulgaria Fountain - Wikipedia, CC Share-Alike license, author: kfsan, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sofia_Bulgaria_Fountain.jpg 

Guess they did pay for:
* Mount Vitoshi - 123RF stock photography http://www.123rf.com/photo_6016126_view-from-coniferous-and-subalpine-zone-of-mount-vitosha.html
 
Hey, thanks, +Ordinal M. . That's some real practical advise. I don't believe newspapers are generally bad, and some are doing some good - open source - stuff. (But then again, I don't consider the Daily Mail to be an actual newspaper. ;)) But yes, them sacking their entire photography staffs & just grabbing stuff of the internet is inherently wrong. Not the least because they should set the standard of 'good practice' imho. So you're volunteering to read over my communications, should they not have responded yet by monday evening? :))

(And how does this work under UK law -- in .be law, I should probably send them a 'signed for' letter, to proof they actually received notice. Same there, or will email to editor + picture address listed on their website do?) 
 
I was thinking +Ann Wuyts maybe there are some in the 'Scotland phography' community who can help you out. 
 
Either send them an invoice or a DMCA takedown notice. Or both.
 
Hi, I came across a link to this conversation over on Reddit. If you're looking for a good invoice template, Apple's Numbers app (part of iWork) comes with a very nice one that's easy to customize. That's what I use for clients -- have never had to send one out to an image thief! Good luck.
 
Don't just straight-up send an invoice. Email  or call them firmly but politely explaining the license the image was posted under and stating that you'd like to be credited for the picture. I'd also suggest saying in the email that if you do not receive a reply within X number of days, you will be sending an invoice. 

Of course, without any sort of contract signed, they're not obliged to pay it. But it will either force them to credit you or remove the image. If they don't do either, you can then send them a DMCA takedown notice. You can find out how to at the link below.

http://rising.blackstar.com/how-to-send-a-dmca-takedown-notice.html 
 
+Karl Gookey the Blackstar-link is US law. This is in the UK. Won't be much different, but it needs the names of UK laws.

Add a comment...