The dawn of social media, 4G and connected devices such as smartphones and tablets has meant sharing photos on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram is common practice. Inevitably, the rise in the number of platforms where individuals can easily access professional and amateur images alike has brought the age-old issue around copyright back to the fore.
High profile cases, like the closure of Napster at the turn of the century have meant consumers understand copyright rules when it comes to downloading music and video content, but it would seem that a number of misconceptions exist around image copyright.
Arguably, when it comes to image sharing on social media, we enter a bit of a grey area over who owns what. A lot of people believe that if the photographer/user puts the picture into the public domain like Twitter, it is free for anyone to use and replicate. The truth is that under the law, it is the photographer that owns the copyright. Twitter’s terms of service allows the platform to use the photo or video but not anyone else.
A recent example of this issue being thrown into the limelight was the helicopter crash in London. The Evening Standard used an eye-witness image taken on a smartphone and then posted on Twitter as the front page splash.
The rise of social media and connected devices has severely altered the way news is broken and subsequently reported. Smartphones have automatically made a lot of us ‘citizen journalists.’ When we witness something obscure, our gut reaction is to take a photo and then share it across our social media platforms for our friends and family to see. Consequently, news is often broken on social platforms first and therefore many journalists and picture desks use Twitter in a similar way to a news wire.
Nevertheless, it is vital to remember that no matter where they are posted or by whom, images remain bound by copyright. The Evening Standard were aware of the copyright implications and claimed they were unable to get permission for use at the time of going to print, however were more than willing to reimburse the photographer should he want payment.
However, the result hasn’t always been so amicable. In the past, both The Wall Street Journal and Agence France Press were found by a judge to have infringed copyright laws by using photographer Daniel Morel’s images of the Haiti earthquake that were posted on Twitter.
If permission by the photographer is granted or an image is successfully purchased, it is also imperative that you have the correct licenses for images. For example, Apple was recently sued by a Swiss photographer for using an image commercially – i.e. for purposes that were not previously agreed. Rights-managed images typically hold restrictions on duration of use, geographic location or industry.
These are a few ways you can avoid breaching the copyright law:
For more information and to unravel the complexities of image rights, sites such as Stockphotorights.com can be useful. In addition, the PicScout ImageExchange application, a free, downloadable tool which helps content users find out where they may properly license images found on the internet, is also very helpful.
Social media has certainly caused some confusion around image rights, but copyright law is there to protect a photographer’s intellectual property and to prevent others taking the credit for their hard work. It’s great that people are now uploading their images via channels like Twitter, Facebook, Flickr and Pinterest, and we should celebrate such work by sharing/engaging with it, however it is vital to make sure the originator is credited.
The photography industry is now stepping up its right to salvage the situation and claim their rights, and it is important that small businesses and marketers have the right information on how to access content that is affordable, helping them avoid the pitfalls of image copyright.