I was very unsure where to post this and felt this was the best forum, so please let me know and I will have this moved.



Back in 2006 I was asked to have an image used for a scientific paper, I said sure. Here is the result:

If you registered the copyright already, you're set to go. Contact the Associated Press and see where it goes; if they don't play ball, you're in exactly the position you need to be to recover damages, statutory damages, and your attorneys' fees.

If you haven't already registered the copyright, you need to do so before you can file suit. You still have the right to get the image pulled (and get paid for the misuse) without registering or filing suit, but you can't file a suit until the image is registered. You will be not be entitled to statutory damages or attorneys' fees if it isn't already registered.

After a couple of minutes of quick Google searching, I found that the image is associated with work that was done at UC - San Diego. Were you a student at the university while you took the image? Was the image taken with a camera or any other equipment provided by the university? Did you assign ownership to the university for the photo? Did you sign a contract with the university when you gave them the photo?

As outlined in the university copyright policy (http://adminrecords.ucsd.edu/ppm/docs/500-5.HTML), the university retains the right to a number of categories of copyright. Your photo might exemplify one of those categories. If so, the university owns the copyright and (as noted in the policy) has the right to license the copyright to third parties (of which the Associated Press would be an example).

On the bright side -- it looks like your photo appeared in a number of high profile news sources, including MSNBC. In some of those photos, your name was credited. In others, unfortunately it was not.

I know how hairy the copyright ownership situation can be at universities. I dealt with it first hand. Good luck in future endeavors and always remember to read the fine print!

Thanks for the input-

AP had it wrong from the start as I was not or never was affiliated with UCSD. However, I did work with the researcher while he was at the University of Chicago. He asked me for an image to use and I agreed for photo credit for this paper. Never signed anything, just verbal about use for this paper.

Dan

dbaleckaitis wrote:
Thanks for the input-

AP had it wrong from the start as I was not or never was affiliated with UCSD. However, I did work with the researcher while he was at the University of Chicago. He asked me for an image to use and I agreed for photo credit for this paper. Never signed anything, just verbal about use for this paper.

Dan

Then you might want to check the copyright policy for the University of Chicago, although, it is probably similar to the one from UCSD (most of them are roughly the same). How was the image obtained? Were you getting paid by the University to shoot starlings?

I did not get paid by the U of C or UCSD. The picture was taken on my own time and was asked to have it used for Photo Credit as it was unclear that as cool of a result the paper contained that it was possible that only the U oc C paper would run the picture.

Thanks for your time,
Dan

Well -- just my personal opinion, but getting any kind of royalties for the use of your photo is probably out of the question by now, and even if it was possible, would probably be more trouble than it's worth.

At first glance it seems like the researcher you worked with took your photo without consent and supplied it with the articles he wrote at UCSD -- then the photo was submitted to the journal Nature (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7088/pdf/4401117a.pdf) and subsequently published, including a photo credit to you. The photo also appeared in a number of other journals (just do a search for your last name in the major science journals or on Google). It's a little unclear how the photo managed to get licensed to the AP from UCSD, other than being supplied for free or for a licensing fee, or perhaps, AP has a contract with major universities to license their photos for distribution (not uncommon).

My guess is that UCSD never inquired about the source of the photo when it began distributing. The paper trail on this issue is indeed very complicated. Perhaps you should contact the person you worked with at Chicago and at least explain to him or her that the photo was not intended to be distributed to such a wide audience.

You also need to make sure that your other photos do not end up being used by wire agencies. For instance, I see you have a few photos of another bird (a finch?) online. Apparently that photo was supplied to the PLOS (Public Library of Science), which distributes all its content including photos under the CC attribution license (any kind of distribution of copyrighted material is OK as long as the original author was attributed). If that is OK with you, then OK. If not, you should get that photo removed before it ends up on another newspaper website.

Most journals require a copyright transfer by the author (or by one author on behalf of the other authors, if multiple authors). To reprint a figure or photograph it may only be legally necessary to ask permission from the journal (although most will also ask an author at the same time). Reprint permission is almost invariably granted.

This may be a case of sloppiness on the part of one or more author, who just "forgot" about a previously agreed arrangement.

This is probably a case of the cow being out of the barn, but if it does bother you and you're willing to track down and (eventually, eventually) bring an end to unauthorized use:

1. Register the copyright of the image.
2. Use "TinEye" (Google for it) to do a Google-style search for appearances of the image on the web, then contact the webmasters of those sites to advise them of the copyright.
3. When webmasters don't respond, contact the hosts for the sites.