Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Yeates  This is very interesting - I can't for a moment see anyone ever being sued over this (I don't think you can be prosecuted over byelaws like this? civil rather than criminal offence?) someone will put me right on this one |
This was touched on earlier Chris and it would appear to be a criminal matter. The NT are certainly claiming that it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Yeates Volunteer Photographer for the NT then they claim the rights to your images - that certainly applies to all the photographs I take as part of my job; I bet that if you were under contract to the NT and something happened to your camera or more importantly to you then their insurance might come in handy! |
In return for privileged access it would be quite reasonable for them to claim non-exclusive rights to the images taken by volunteers. However I believe they were claiming exclusive rights and copyright itself. This is normal if the photographer is an employee but not for a volunteer who isn't under contract and would be expected to insure his own kit. He might be able to claim if he could prove that the camera was damaged due to negligence on the part of the NT but I doubt he'd get very far otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Yeates How could they prove that KeenTeen's Mezereon was taken at a particular site? |
When it comes to flora and fauna they almost certainly can't. As that's mostly what I shoot I shall carry on as I always have and simply not mention if a particular photo was taken on NT land. But anyone who shoots a lot of landscape or architectural work will find it much harder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Yeates I subscribe to the cock-up rather than conspiracy theory of history and suspect the NT will quietly drop this one |
Normally I would agree with you that cock-up is the more likely. However, in this case, the more I read the more it looks like deliberate conspiracy to me. The NT are running regular rights-grabbing photo competitions and trying to take advantage of volunteers to stock their own picture library, while at the same time attempting to turn said picture library into a monopoly by preventing anyone else from selling images taken on NT land. I think it's a deliberate policy and I'm not at all convinced they will drop it unless forced to by overwhelming public opinion (unlikely - most non-photographers won't care) or losing a court case.
Dave P.