Copyright permission.

[FlatEric]

Hi. 😊

 

This is music related, so hope I have put this in the right section?

 

Some of the more longer standing members would be aware of my blog.

Progress on it has been slow but promised myself to crack on again in 2025.

 

So. . . . . I have quite a few books/publications/magazines, some dating back 40+ years and in truth, I have pinched an image/article now and then, only one page.

I now want to take extracts and post them on the blog, the first ones coming from "The Complete Guitar Guide" 1982.

 

The copyright is David Lawrenson/Virgin Books 1982.

I have googled these details and ended up with Random/Penguin, no mention of Virgin, as time has passed.

 

Has anyone had any experience/asked permission for copyright to extract some information on articles? is it relatively simple? Lots of jumping through hoops? Are there any financial implications?

Also looking at extracts from old (1970s) International Musician (I have a lot of them) and found mu:zine who say details could be used from their site, as long as it's a link and been attributed to them. They only have a few of the mags, though.

I've had my images/posts copied many times. I believe I would own the copyright but never been asked but mine is non commercial.

 

Any info would be appreciated.

Cheers. 🙂

 

 

 

[Burns-bass]

I think the risk is very low here and you can always reduce it further by providing clear attribution. In the end, if it's a non-commercial endeavour, it's unlikely anyone will seek to take legal action. If they do, you'll receive a notice to take it down. 

 

As the original author, I guess it depends on the contract you signed at the time. My friend who is a photographer licenses images for specific usage but retains the copyright of them. You may find you retain the copyright of your work and have no issues reproducing it. So publishing the words on your blog might be fine, but an image of the text in a magazine may pose a problem.

 

We're currently involved in a legal "conversation" with a client about content ownership. My view is once they've paid the invoice they own it all (and assume the risk for publishing it). They want us to "own" the risk in perpetuity, which I said we could do but they would need to pay a substantial fee on an ongoing basis. Over to the legal eagles it goes...

[mybass]

Maybe call a publisher and ask what the usual way of working is applied….many authors (of non fictional books) quote from other sources and list the ‘Thanks to’ authors at the end of the book. 

[Mickeyboro]

Publishers have used articles i have written for magazines on the web and not paid me a cent! At the end of the day the publisher as was doesn’t exist - if you can trace the author his approval would be nice and would probably ensure no comeback. 

[BigRedX]

The Mu:zines project is a worthwhile endeavour, and if you have issues of International Musician that are missing from their archive and digitisation schedule it would be worth lending them your copies in order for them to be added to the archive. My understanding is that they have already negotiated all the copyright issues, so if all they require is a link and an attribution that would be a small price to pay in order to be legally covered for usage in you blog.

 

There is also a massive difference between quoting a few sentences from a source with an acknowledgement and reproducing an article wholesale, so decide what you want to use and act accordingly.

 

I do page layout and graphic design for a number of small publications and there is an amazingly cavalier attitude to photo usage in particular, in that some of the contributors to these publications think that because they have seen something on a web site it can be used without any compensation (either literal or financial) in their articles. After one of these publications came unstuck spectacularly for using photographs without permission (luckily in an issue from before I started working for them, so I'm not involved) I now include a clause in my artwork sign-off that states that the publishers/editors of the publication in question certify that they own the copyright, have permission, or a licence from the copyright holder to use all the text and images being reproduced.

 

Photographs are a particular problem because the copyright often remains with the photographer, so even if you have permission to reproduce the text from the author you may need a separate permission/licence for the accompanying photographs. Remember that anything on-line is much easier to find that an obscure printed book/magazine and some photo copyright services have automated procedures for scanning through web pages and even hosted PDFs to track down photographs being used without the correct permission.

 

I'm just coming to the end of a vast project producing a 400+ book detailing various exploits during WWII that has reproduced numerous written sources and photographs. In most cases getting permission to quote text from other books was easy, the author of this book contacted the author of the book(s) he wanted to quote, and they were happy for either a written acknowledgement in the book and the possibility of using any new information that had been uncovered in a subsequent edition of their book with a reciprocal acknowledgement. For the photographs it was a lot harder and much more expensive. Apart form photographs taken by people in the book and which have been supplied by their relatives, everything else has had to be licensed from the various copyright holders who all need to know various details such as proposed printing quantities, image reproduction size, and distribution reach. I've just finished negotiating with the IWM for the last batch of photos we want to use which, even with a hefty discount, have cost several thousand pounds in licence and scanning fees.

 

Tread with care and make sure you have exhausted all possibilities for getting permission first.

Edited December 6 by BigRedX

[FlatEric]

Thanks to you all, food for thought.

 

BRX - Thank you for your input, I have read it a couple of times and I will perhaps read it a couple more, to make sure.

 

I thumb through my books now and again and my International Musician mags (70s and early 80s) and think they would make great reading to the world out there. The Mu:zine route may be interesting, I will try and contact them.

 

Cheers. 😊

[Stub Mandrel]

As a magazine editor...

 

The layout of a magazine article has copyright for 25 years, but the content is copyright for 70 years after the author's death.

 

But, works can be copied in any medium if they are used solely to illustrate a point, are not for commercial purposes, and are accompanied by sufficient acknowledgement. You should only use the minimum required to make a point e.g. a page not a whole article.

[FlatEric]

3 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:

As a magazine editor...

 

The layout of a magazine article has copyright for 25 years, but the content is copyright for 70 years after the author's death.

 

But, works can be copied in any medium if they are used solely to illustrate a point, are not for commercial purposes, and are accompanied by sufficient acknowledgement. You should only use the minimum required to make a point e.g. a page not a whole article.

Hiya.

 

Bit like the response from BRX. . . . . very interesting!!

It isn't for any form of financial gain and it is to explain/enhance a feature.

This, for example, took images from various sources, to explain /enhance understanding - some of it given by Peter.

Images in feature

So, taking what you have detailed (I admit there are no acknowledgements on these) this is what you mean/imply?

Again, I was pointed to some of these by Peter, who himself, was a journalist - these are sort of one page, to illustrate.

Would this be OK, from the way you have explained it?

inserts into a whole feature

 

In the past I have used things that I couldn't attribute to anyone/organisation and no one has taken issue from it.

To confirm, not one penny has been earned from anything I have posted.

 

😎

[Stub Mandrel]

It's hard to say. I would use attribution where you can. Consider reducing resolution to the minimum required.

 

And don't forget an embedded link often avoids issues...

 

[FlatEric]

Noted.

Thank you.

 

All the best.

Cheers. : )