Change to terms and conditions

seymouraves said:

I think a note saying that the RSPB would ask out of courtesy before using any post might have been useful.

I can see photographers not posting their best Hi Res pics on here now.

Mrs T gave that assurance regarding use of photographs in this post.

http://www.rspb.org.uk/community/wildlife/f/19351/p/60031/399474.aspx#399474

I tend to agree with S. I guess a clause stating permission would be asked before use tends to defeat the royal free rights bit of the clause. I would prefer a statement saying they have a single use right after which permission to use again would be required.

I'll continue to post based upon Mrs T assurances, I'm happy for the RSPB to use any of my pictures in aid of their work should they wish to. All I'd ask is for a credit for the picture.

Andrew

All the photos I post are reduced in quality anyway simply because they would be too large with the original resolution.

Since I am strictly an amateur I would actually be quite flattered (and surprised) if the RSPB wanted to use one of my photos so it's not a problem for me. I can understand, however, that professional or semi-professional photographers would be more cautious about posting their work.

It's now mid-day, I'm awake and I've re-read the new T's&T'c - pasted below.

By submitting any contribution to the RSPB Community you agree to grant the RSPB a perpetual, royalty-free, non-exclusive sub-licensable right and world-wide licence to use, distribute, display, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works and display and exercise all publicity rights with respect to your contribution. The RSPB also reserves the right to incorporate your contribution in other works or media now known or later developed in accordance with privacy restrictions set out in the RSPB's Privacy Policy.

Sub-licensable - means they can sell the rights to others for reproduction.

World-wide - Pretty obvious

modify, adapt - crop or otherwise alter the image to, for example, remove any copyright logo.

You may retain the original copy right but it's fairly meaningless. Let's pretend that Nat Geo sees one of you pictures via a publication from the RSPB. Mr Nat Geo says WOW, I need that, Mr. RSPB says no problem how much is it worth to you. I still own the copy right, I always did, but by uploading to the RSPB web-site I've given the RSPB total freedom to do whatever, whenever with the picture.

Think it will be a mention to my web-site from now on if anybody wishes to see the pictures I take.

Andrewa A said:

You may retain the original copy right but it's fairly meaningless. Let's pretend that Nat Geo sees one of you pictures via a publication from the RSPB. Mr Nat Geo says WOW, I need that, Mr. RSPB says no problem how much is it worth to you. I still own the copy right, I always did, but by uploading to the RSPB web-site I've given the RSPB total freedom to do whatever, whenever with the picture.

Hi Andrew

I think your summary is correct.

In the past I have sold some of my photos (not of birds) for use in books and magazines, and I used to have a web-site advertising what was available. I have never had any concerns before about uploading photos onto the RSPB site, but I might consider reducing the size and quality from now on.

It seems logical to me that if a photo is used and a fee is paid then the copyright owner should either get that fee or at least be asked if they want it.

I can't see a problem to be honest. A low-res reduced dimension photo is all that is needed on the forum, and will upload faster too.

I said this before, but when the RSPB wanted to use one of my photos to advertise one of its bird baths they sent me a private email asking my permission and how I wished to be credited.

I'm happy for the RSPB to use my photos, but not happy for them to be used in any other, commercial way unless I get a fee, because photography is a (tiny but growing) part of my livelihood. I never post large, high resolution images on the forum. I'm not actually worried about the RSPB themselves, but anyone, registered or not, who visits the forum (or even just the internet, because photos posted on here will come up in a Google images search) could swipe them.

The RSPB contacted me a while ago asking to use a photo I'd posted for some internal presentation thingy, and I said this (part of a longer message): 'I'm fine for the RSPB to use the pic in their own literature/presentations/whatever, but I don't want it used in commercial publications without my permission,' and explained that, unlikely as it sounds, exactly that had happened with images Mr aiki and I gave to a different wildlife charity. The reply I got said this: 'Thanks for your speedy response and permission for us to use the image. I will add a note that it’s for internal use only.' That seemed fine to me.

Hi-

I've had problems with similar contracts before-  they try to do a 'one size fits all'  but it obviously doesnt work.

I always have a custom made contract for all work submitted. My standard clause gives them one use only. If they want total all inclusive rights they can have it but they pay for it at full market rate.

:)

S