Originally posted by Paul
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Who Was Jack The Ripper ? (H Division, 2019)
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Steve Stanley View PostOh, It's been said to his face....And I've been there. Took me some 18 months from 2015 to actually work out who the good guys were and that it wasn't just a 'spate'.....I'm more than happy with the company I keep......You have to make a stand somewhere
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rob Clack View PostApparently that is what I have said. Only you and John know the answer. Well John anyway as I know you had nothing to do with the images. I wouldn't have accused you of it anyway as you explained that it was nothing to do with you and I am happy with that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paul View PostI appreciate that, but John is my co-author and we share the responsibility for the book. That's the way co-authorship works.
Perhaps I am just letting unimportant people get my back up.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rob Clack View PostApparently that is what I have said. Only you and John know the answer. Well John anyway as I know you had nothing to do with the images. I wouldn't have accused you of it anyway as you explained that it was nothing to do with you and I am happy with that.
I think it's about time I said something, Rob.
When I sourced those images 7/8 years ago, I was probably aware that you had posted them somewhere (on Casebook, as many of us have done), but at no point in those postings did I recall you saying that they were yours to own or that you had the rights to them. Finding the copyright to images like those - particularly the illustrations featured in publications that had a wide circulation - is almost impossible. They're over 100 years old. To be frank, they're probably no more yours than they are mine. I cleaned them up, altered some of the contrasts, rejigged the resolution for print and put them down as ‘author’s collection’ in the CSI book, and owing to the uncertainty of such images, the “all attempts to locate the copyright holder...” stuff in the book was a general caveat seen everywhere which in no way prevented you from getting in touch with me on publication about ‘your’ images at the time.
You've had 7 years to do this and choose now to bring it up.
If I had used your 1990 photo of Durward Street and attributed it to ‘author’s collection’ you would have a very valid point to make. But I didn’t. There was no question of it being yours. And you were credited and paid for it. As were many other sources including Evans/Skinner (who contributed most of the images), Tower Hamlets, MoL, Getty, Mary Evans, Mirrorpix, etc etc. with what was quite a tight picture budget considering the nature of the book. It was hard going.
This is all I am able to say on this matter for now.
JB
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rob Clack View PostI am not happy with the way they turned up in the book and stealing is too strong a word and not one I would have used.
Perhaps I am just letting unimportant people get my back up.
Comment
-
Originally posted by John Bennett View PostI think it's about time I said something, Rob.
When I sourced those images 7/8 years ago, I was probably aware that you had posted them somewhere (on Casebook, as many of us have done), but at no point in those postings did I recall you saying that they were yours to own or that you had the rights to them. Finding the copyright to images like those - particularly the illustrations featured in publications that had a wide circulation - is almost impossible. They're over 100 years old. To be frank, they're probably no more yours than they are mine. I cleaned them up, altered some of the contrasts, rejigged the resolution for print and put them down as ‘author’s collection’ in the CSI book, and owing to the uncertainty of such images, the “all attempts to locate the copyright holder...” stuff in the book was a general caveat seen everywhere which in no way prevented you from getting in touch with me on publication about ‘your’ images at the time.
You've had 7 years to do this and choose now to bring it up.
If I had used your 1990 photo of Durward Street and attributed it to ‘author’s collection’ you would have a very valid point to make. But I didn’t. There was no question of it being yours. And you were credited and paid for it. As were many other sources including Evans/Skinner (who contributed most of the images), Tower Hamlets, MoL, Getty, Mary Evans, Mirrorpix, etc etc. with what was quite a tight picture budget considering the nature of the book. It was hard going.
This is all I am able to say on this matter for now.
JB
And if I understand you correctly If I bought and paid for an image (which sometimes isn't cheap) post it on the web. It is fair game for you or anyone else to download and use as there own just because it is out of copyright? Just adjust the contrast a bit do a bit of clean up and nobody would be any the wiser.
Very ethical. This is why I put a watermark on my images.
And I brought this up now to show the double standards of people over recent events.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paul View PostWell, it seems we both received the same DVD today. I'm planning to wallow for a while in a bit of Barlow and Watt. Maybe you should do the same.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rob Clack View PostNever thought about just asking?
And if I understand you correctly If I bought and paid for an image (which sometimes isn't cheap) post it on the web. It is fair game for you or anyone else to download and use as there own just because it is out of copyright? Just adjust the contrast a bit do a bit of clean up and nobody would be any the wiser.
Very ethical. This is why I put a watermark on my images.
And I brought this up now to show the double standards of people over recent events.
Thank you for your succinct reply, Rob. As much as I felt I was being honest here, I now feel like a total c*nt.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Steve Stanley View PostIf....It's out of copywrite, surely it isn't 'yours'..Ok you've paid commercially for the use of it, but does that give you any legal rights to it?
Some of the images John used were out of copyright but he paid to use them in the book.
Comment
Comment