Forum Moderators: not2easy
First I knew about it was when a friend emailed me to ask if I had seen it. I popped down to the newsagent and bought a copy.
Great article, very positive about us etc (and generated quite a lot of traffic over the weekend), but they stole several of our graphics from the site. I was never approached for permission.
On the inside front cover of this magazine is the usual (c) Our Publishing Co. plc 2003 for all magazine content. There is no reference to us under the images in the magazine to say that we have the copyright in those (our website has a copyright notice on every page at the bottom). The "sweep up" copyright in the magazine therefore rather implies that they own these images.
I'm a bit p*ssed about it. Mostly because one of the graphics they have used I spent about 5 hours on to create and I feel like they've just stolen it with no reference to me.
In future I think this magazine will do further articles on us, so I want to keep them sweet. By the same token, I want to make it clear that they cannot do this in future. If they had just asked me, I would have immediately given them consent (provided they put a "kindly reprinted with the permission of etc" type notice underneath it). It's the fact that they didn't ask and they just feel that they can take whatever they want. I guess they know that it's good publicity for us and they think that we won't complain.
I'm amazed that a professional publishing company would go doing something like this.
I just wanted to vent really - anyone else had similar experience with the press/magazines?
TJ
Most professional publishers are well aware of copyright and adhere to the rules without a problem.
I'm not suggesting this publisher is in any way breaking rules, but, stolen is a rather strong and emotive word to employ.
If it is clearly shown as your site and the material is not used out of context then that is good. No further acknowledgement is needed.
If you feel they have stolen graphics from you then you should take it up with the publisher, but, to be honest, unless the article is negative in any way, you should consider the positive aspect and be pleased they featured the site.
If you do complain, be aware that you may be burning your boat for future coverage. If they have used the material incorrectly, you will be able to get a correction and acknowledgement in subsequent issues (publishing schedule and space permitting).
Many companies have to pay shed loads to get coverage in the press. ;-)
Of course I'm more than happy with the positive press coverage. And they did include the URL to our site (which was the equivilent of some chunky backlinks in terms of traffic).
However, although the article mentioned only our site it also included some general information about widgets and it's in this general context that my graphics were used. That's what annoyed me. If the context were our site, it wouldn't be a problem.
I'm a person of principle, and this is in no doubt to my mind theft of intellectual property. The site in question is a non-profit hobby site so I can afford to have those principles!
I think I'll do an email that's very positive and thanking them for the article, but perhaps mention in passing that if they spoke to me and requested consent I could have sent them the original print quality Photoshop graphics rather than the 72dpi web optimized ones..... ;-)
TJ
I think I'll do an email that's very positive and thanking them for the article, but perhaps mention in passing that if they spoke to me and requested consent I could have sent them the original print quality Photoshop graphics rather than the 72dpi web optimized ones..... ;-)
If I was going to complain at all - this would be the way to do it.
Also, you could add that you have some other nice graphics - if they want permission to use them...
I don't like the "big publisher pushing the little guy around" style tactics, so it's a matter of principle.
I've sent the mail - kept it positive but at the same time showing them that I'm not a push-over.
TJ
But, and this is a big but, papers and magazines don't generally ask permission to use images from your site if they are used to promote your site. They know all about copyright but I know that they don't feel it is necessary to ask when the material is used to promote a site.
The reason they don't do it is because, generally, if they use some screenshots and logos from, say, Ebay in an article about how wonderful Ebay is - they know that Ebay won't get angry.
But, and this is a big but, papers and magazines don't generally ask permission to use images from your site if they are used to promote your site.
I think you're probably right, but I wouldn't have minded if underneath the image it had actually said "reprinted from www.tjs-world-of-widgets.com".
The article had been done in such a way as to imply that the magazine had created the article (even though they then pointed readers to the website). Hard to explain without giving specifics or pointing you at the magazine, but it was bordering on being extremely naughty at best!
TJ
I have also been in your same situation, and I was happy to have the publicity, and I didn't feel it was worth letting them know I was unhappy about their uncredited use of the photo, and jeopardize any future publicity they may have sent my way.
If you send them the higher dpi image next time, simply add some white space on the bottom, and using the same font as the magazine uses, add "© 2003 trillianjedi" or whatever your copyright notice would be. They would then have to knowingly crop out that copyright notice to use the image - but they might just leave it in, or include their own crediting you. If I were you, I wouldn't hold my breath, but it couldn't hurt either ;)
