Matt
I am 100% sure that I have hundreds of thousands of photographs all over the net that are legal as we took them. I can also name over 10 companies that are using them to market their own services which is probably illegal. However, I have not got the time or wish to chase them for it.
I also know we have hundreds of videos all around the net and some may not have been loaded with music that comes from the store of music that we pay for each year.
I like every other business owner will get things wrong, as long as as I learn and correct them I can live with it.
However, that was not the issue I was addressing I was stating that I was surprised that you were being so public about another business in the written word. Like I said horse for courses but an interesting space to be willing to travel.
With regards your reference to Dunblane . You actually used the words that are most suited to this reference. I was in Dunblane on that day. My wife spent weeks after the event visiting those poor soles who had lost children due to her job. I also have more knowledge of guns and what can be done with them than is probably right. In no way does any of the above have even the slightest comparison to any business issue
no matter how serious you think the business issue is, it is totally out of context for you to compare it to what happened that day.
As it happens I too was unwillingly 'connected' to the Dunblane Masacre is that I was one of the many media personnel charged with descending upon that town in the aftermath. It IS a painful memory, especially as I have relatives (In-Laws) in the town, one of which might easily have been one of the victims but for her developing a cold and being kept off school that day...
I'm not making comparisons with
what happened on that day. I'm pointing two things out
about the aftermath and events leading up to it:
1) HAD certain individuals spoken out, actively advocated and used the checks and safeguards that were already in place that individual would never have been in a position to do what he did.
2) HAD that incident been prevented, not only would the tragic loss of life been stopped (which I admit IS a more serious and incomparable issue) but the loss of an industry would have been prevented.
Remember, there was at least one independent Gunsmith who took his own life in the aftermath; driven to bankruptcy through the destruction of his trade. Others still simply 'folded', forcing people onto the dole and in several cases into a spiral of ongoing hopelessness, alcoholism, depression etc... Similar things happened to workers in related fields such as on many farm shoots and some of the smaller estates...
One of those guys is an ex-business neighbour of mine. His nice house in the Kilpatrick hills just a memory, as is the family he once had... Now a shambling wreck living alone in a council flat; The last time I spoke to the fellow he expressed the wish that he were dead. If that isn't also a tragedy then what is?
Those things ARE business issues as well as human issues. The fellow who killed himself had a family, kids, grandkids... God forbid that there is some rogue operator in your own field, who is being tolerated or ignored.
I was stating that I was surprised that you were being so public about another business in the written word. Like I said horse for courses but an interesting space to be willing to travel.
For evil to flourish good many need only do nothing. It's NOT a space I travel alone. And like many in my profession I've no difficulty in exposing those who place the community at risk. I'm VERY open, and have no difficult committing to print, my attitude to those who are damaging the creative industries and indeed the business community in general.
The individual in question has attracted the 'attention' of
many professional photographers, video producers and editorial producers. He's actively sought press attention to promote a point of view that is all of dangerous, ill-informed, is taking the bread and butter out of the mouths of legitimate professionals, and exposing his followers to the risk of losing everything they've ever worked for. One day, the echoes of his stupidity may well cost someone their life... Or, if they're very lucky, leave them a shambling clinically depressed wreck like that out-of-work gunsmith...
Your own awareness of Copyright in fact extends to generating your own material and paying for licensed music. That you're prepared to tolerate the abuse of your own material is of course your own concern. However while the so-called victims of Getty, Corbis et all are whinging about bills for a couple of grand, they could EASILY be ultimately facing bills reaching into the £20K-30K ranges.... Though the figure seems to be 'buried' I suspect JA Coles won't be seeing much change from £20K
Certainly many rights owners are ascribing clearly stated default values for limited licensing of their material as part of the T&Cs that allow access to that material. Default values of £30K-£150K are not uncommon now. An EXPENSIVE mistake to be willing to make, even if you don't let it get as far as a court order!
And the fact is as traditional revenue streams from hard-media dry up, and virtual delivery becomes the norm (as it has with music) rights owners will only ever become more litigious in their efforts to protect those streams and that income.
The fact is that anyone who doesn't fully understand how to manage IPR has no more business creating content than someone with an ordinary car licence has getting behind of an articulated lorry and taking it out, on their own, onto the public roads....
