Circuit copyright - Page 3

vwpilot · 18 Nov 2004, 00:13 (Ref:1156609)

It goes all ways. The circuit cannot sell for profit photos of a team or driver without the permission of the team/driver (unless that is signed away by entering an event).

Likewise if you provide photos to a team for them to use them in advetising they are also supposed to get the permission of the circuit and any sponsor names visible in the photo.

But it comes down to recognizable things. If you take a close up shot and you cannot tell the car is at whatever track, then you dont need to worry about it. But if it is recognizable, then you need to get permission.

Also, if you read the back of any normal ticket for admission to a sporting event you will see that by attending you release all your rights to them using your likeness in either photography, tv or whatever. So no, those fans in the stands have no legal rights to protecting thier likeness.

Picturesports · 18 Nov 2004, 12:37 (Ref:1156986)

I haven't got the answers but this thread did make me think.

Question: One the side of a car is a Castrol sticker. This is a trade mark that belongs to Castrol who have chosen to market that image. How can the circuit (or even the photographer for that matter) claim copyright over a trade marked logo.

Would not both the circuit and the photographer need Castrol's permission to reproduce the trade marked logo.

It is in Castrol's interest to have the logo reproduced so the situation I describe is hypothetical, the question is how can a third party (the circut) claim copyright over someone elses property. The driver I'm assuming does not have permission from Castrol to assign the rights to Castrol's logo.

Bottom line is this all a bit of a chocolate tea pot.

Happy Snapper · 18 Nov 2004, 12:44 (Ref:1156989)

Yep 100% correct

vwpilot · 18 Nov 2004, 17:40 (Ref:1157220)

Yes, that is the whole point here. But in addition to Castrol, if you get a shot of a recognizable part of circuit, the circuit has the same rights as Castrol does. Though the circuit isnt copyrighted per se, it is protected from its image being reproduced and profitted off of without permission.

The same as with the portrait of a driver (or any sports figure or celebrity), the make of the car, and anything else that is recognizable in the shot.

For instance, if any of you have picked up a Canon 9900 printer lately, at least in the states on the packaging is a photo of Marco Werner and the Audi R8. I konw the photographer who took the shots. Though it was not his responsibility, he told me that Canon had to get permission from every single sponsor that could be read on the Audi, from Audi, from the team, and from Marco. Many were not an issue as Canon sponsored the car, but others like Shell gasoline and infineon and the others all had to give permission before that box could be used to sell printers.

Again, all of this is moot though if you are selling for etitorial purposes. But whenever I sell a photo, I put the responsibility in obtaining any releases required on the purchaser. I dont have the time or contacts to worry about getting them all. When I sell for an advertisement, I put it on the invoice that the responsibility is with the purchaser not me. Dont know what would happen if it really came down to legal problems, but its what I do so that the purchaser can deal with the problems.

David L · 13 Dec 2004, 21:39 (Ref:1178704)

Perhaps a few points of clarification..

1. The circuit cannot claim copyright of your work, that would imply they can reproduce your work..

2. They can claim commercial rights over any event at the circuit.. that's why your ticket stub basically states you can only take photo's for personal use.. Once you display them or try to sell them, then your in breach of the contact you made with the circuit when you bought the ticket..

3. media use is different to commercial use.. For media use you are effectively being paid time to attend and provide images for press/pr use.. Commercial use would be gathering the pictures for later sale.. The media use implies a pre-arranged contract..

4. I believe that teams/drivers are required to waive certain commercial rights and also to have certain commercial restrictions placed on them as part of their entry etc..

5. A typical circuit commercial arrangement can be seen with the picture sellers at Le Mans who must have purchased a licence to sell the prints to the public during the meeting..

David

Steve Wilkinson · 15 Dec 2004, 17:32 (Ref:1180325)

A few years ago at the German Grand Prix the TV cameras did a slow pan of the crowd before the race got underway. Sat bang in the middle of the shot was a bloke with a very attractive blonde. Unfortunately the guy's wife was sat at home watching. It appears the blonde was the guy's secretary and you can guess the rest.

The wife duly sued for divorce whilst the bloke countersued the TV company for broadcasting his image without permission. He recovered more from the TV company than he had to cough up to his now ex-wife.

Since then most circuits make it clear on the booking form and ticket that you surrender your privacy when you buy the ticket and that your image MAY be broadcast or appear in magazines or newspapers.

One thing that you also need to be aware of is that some circuits are now insisting on any photographers who sign on as Media have personal liability insurance.

Snapperjack · 17 Dec 2004, 14:22 (Ref:1181894)

So would I be right in thinking that you would need to get licenses to sell F1 images (from anywhere) and it does not matter whether you own the copyright or not? ie http://www.formula-one-pictures.com/.

Is that is going to be the way all meetings are going in the future. How are club drivers going to get photos for their sponsors etc if they cannot be bought from 'media' photographers?

PaulSands · 17 Dec 2004, 14:33 (Ref:1181905)

There will no doubt be offical photographers at cicuits much like Mallory have done (sore point)...good gig to get I suppose

Snapperjack · 17 Dec 2004, 15:01 (Ref:1181920)

Monopolies Commission? lol

stefan · 17 Dec 2004, 15:15 (Ref:1181927)

This really is beginning to take all the fun out of it. Just as I was beginning to feel good about myself for getting a few Le Mans Classic snaps in magazines and earning a few quid to go towards my extortionate ferry crossing - I have to read this. I thought maybe I might print a few of the images, get them mounted and see if I could display them in a gallery - maybe sell a few to cover costs. Don't suppose I'll bother now.

If you photograph an event as part of the media can you later apply for commercial rights to sell images independently?

What's the situation with picture libraries - are you supposed to be media or commercial - or do they sort all that out?

David L · 17 Dec 2004, 18:11 (Ref:1182031)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snapperjack

So would I be right in thinking that you would need to get licenses to sell F1 images (from anywhere) and it does not matter whether you own the copyright or not? ie http://www.formula-one-pictures.com/.

Yes.. That's certainly how I understand it.. In fact, I used to have the link to the right area on the FIA web-site but darn if it hasn't now changed.. I'll try and find it..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snapperjack

Is that is going to be the way all meetings are going in the future. How are club drivers going to get photos for their sponsors etc if they cannot be bought from 'media' photographers?

You need to follow the rules and regulations for the particular championship/venue.

David L · 17 Dec 2004, 18:13 (Ref:1182032)

Quote:

Originally Posted by stefan

What's the situation with picture libraries - are you supposed to be media or commercial - or do they sort all that out?

They sort all that out..

redshoes · 17 Dec 2004, 22:21 (Ref:1182186)

Earlier this year I was chatting to some of the TOCA Tour regular snappers and the subject of accreditation for the GP came up. This was before the GP support race got cancelled. Can't remember the exact wording on the application form but basically implied that if you were there to cover a support race you should close your eyes and look away whenever the F1 boys were on track.

David L · 17 Dec 2004, 23:43 (Ref:1182238)

Quote:

Originally Posted by redshoes

Earlier this year I was chatting to some of the TOCA Tour regular snappers and the subject of accreditation for the GP came up. This was before the GP support race got cancelled. Can't remember the exact wording on the application form but basically implied that if you were there to cover a support race you should close your eyes and look away whenever the F1 boys were on track.

Oh yeah, that's quite the norm I believe.. I know somebody who was going to shoot the Renault V6's at Monaco.. I ventured that it might be fun to just chill and take some of the classic Monaco shots of the F1 cars whilst he was out there.. He told me that there would be no chance of that as the accreditation for the V6's would exclude him from being out on the track during any F1 action..

James North · 18 Dec 2004, 09:22 (Ref:1182400)

Bloody hell, that is screwed up.

These media bigwigs... they make things too complicated.

Okay fair enoguh keeping joe bloggs and anybody who hasn't got geniune to be published work to do.

But Strewth!! If you're going to give accreditation to someone to cover an event, it may as well be for all the track action.

Commercial monolpoly and all that is out of proportion.

Davhut · 7 Apr 2006, 13:48 (Ref:1573126)

I don't know UK law, but what if you simply removed any mention of the venue? Let them prove where the photo was taken.

PDS · 7 Apr 2006, 16:56 (Ref:1573287)

This practice seems to becoming the 'Norm'.

On the Media accreditation for the Imperial War Museum at Duxford for 2006.

They state 'Any film, photographs or information gathered at Duxford may only be used for News purposes and not for commercial distribution' They are only accepting people from the Media, not photographers who are there to take and then sell images to anyone.

But I am not sure how they respond to members of the public at air shows?
I would say that 60% of people at an airshow use camera's. it would be pretty hard to police..

**Snapper Baz** · 10 Apr 2006, 13:40 (Ref:1577615)

Paul, I think it be a better idea not to find out from MSV what the score is in fear of upsetting the applecart. Lets tread boldly...perhaps form the UMPN.... "Undergound Motorsport Photographers Network" where we can work in secrecey! Heres a point...the programme at Snet' this weekend used a picture of mine from Mallory Park a few weeks ago...should I run and hide now???

gungadan · 10 Apr 2006, 14:50 (Ref:1577670)

Big Snip

Quote:

Originally Posted by redshoes

I've been running a website full of photos for a good few
I know I'm not the only person doing this. There's plenty of motorsport picture websites and know a few selling pictures. Is this the start of a clampdown on such sites or was I just unlucky. I'm not going to pretend what I'm doing is right, I'm just curious if anyone else has had a similar experience.

So what was the outcome? I notice you still have a 'order prints' button on your site and the original message was posted in November '04. I think we should be told!

PaulSands · 11 Apr 2006, 14:26 (Ref:1578594)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snapper Baz

the programme at Snet' this weekend used a picture of mine from Mallory Park a few weeks ago...should I run and hide now???

Awwwwww I'm telling

Kelvin · 12 Apr 2006, 13:37 (Ref:1579457)

Quote:

not sure how they respond to members of the public at air shows?

If there was an accident at an air show, I bet they would be keen to ask for images!! I was at snett some years back when an MG Montego rolled in spectaclar fashion. The clerk of the course came around to the spectators close to the accident begging for video footage!! As it happens someone did have some, and he was most grateful!

PaulSands · 12 Apr 2006, 14:26 (Ref:1579492)

Of course the CoC tends to be associated with the organising club rather than the circuit usually doesn't he?

Happy Snapper · 12 Apr 2006, 14:57 (Ref:1579513)

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulSands

Of course the CoC tends to be associated with the organising club rather than the circuit usually doesn't he?

Good point we need to understand that the C o C is nothing to do with the owners or leaseholders of a circuit, his role is with the organising club and not usually the promoting club but they can be the same.. I M O the copyright thing is directly a Circuit owner or leasers issue, ie MSV or BARC not to be confused with MSVR….

**Snapper Baz** · 12 Apr 2006, 21:55 (Ref:1579841)

But what hapens then if a race organising club askes for images taken at one of its own run meetings for its own use (happens to be Mallory Park!)...and the images are given with no payment taking place for the use of those images Ie: given away for free usage?

Happy Snapper · 13 Apr 2006, 05:39 (Ref:1580049)

Very question!
Moving on.... Baz have you done a SCSA meeting yet?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Copyright	Crash and Burn	Announcements and Feedback	3	10 Jan 2002 18:47