The Spitfire thread
- Thread starter Geedee
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
stug3
Staff Sergeant
stug3
Staff Sergeant
.
Last edited:
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
I think that's the shot that won 'RAF Photographer of the Year', either last year, or in 2013. It might be Crown Copyright, as the photographer was serving RAF personnel, so it might be worth checking, just in case !
The crown copyrighting a photo of a SPITFIRE taken by an RAF photographer? Who built it and who pays his wages? I know that is, or maybe the law, but it stinks.
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
The Spitfire is owned by the RAF, the photographer was RAF personnel, working in RAF time, therefore the RAF, MoD or HM Government can have a claim on what is produced. The same goes for WW2 photos taken by the RAF - unless they've been released into the public domain, they remain Crown Copyright.
I used to work for a multi-national photographic manufacturing company, and any photos I took, in company time, technically were the property of that company, even if I used my own equipment. It's unlikely that the company would have pursued any copyright infringement, but they had the power, and the right, to do so.
Likewise with the above photo - it's unlikely that any action will/would be taken, but without seeking prior permission to publish it here, the possibility of infringement action remains.
I used to work for a multi-national photographic manufacturing company, and any photos I took, in company time, technically were the property of that company, even if I used my own equipment. It's unlikely that the company would have pursued any copyright infringement, but they had the power, and the right, to do so.
Likewise with the above photo - it's unlikely that any action will/would be taken, but without seeking prior permission to publish it here, the possibility of infringement action remains.
I know that is the legal situation and it is a shame. The RAF is, as I understand it an Air Force, paid for by the taxes of the citizens of the UK, if the "crown" wants to copyright planes and images of planes then maybe the crown should finance the whole shabang. My grandparents financed Spitfires and all the other equipment that it symbolises, and I finance the RAF today. The guy who took the pic is on my payroll, the plane maybe in private ownership (I dont know) but the Spitfire was financed by the British citizens. The idea that just copying a picture is breaching some law is nauseating, the RAF and the British government will use the spitfire to suite their own ends as and when they want. You are correct Wurger but it gives me the vapours.
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
I agree, but it's the same with your photos, my photos and anyone else's photos - they are the property of the individual concerned, and any photo posted on a web site without prior permission of the 'owner' is potentially infringing copyright laws, even if a copyright watermark is shown, or a credit given.
Many 'owners' won't mind if a credit is posted also, but there are, for example, avaition magazines who are fed up with the unauthorised use of their material, and are pursuing the infringements.
Many 'owners' won't mind if a credit is posted also, but there are, for example, avaition magazines who are fed up with the unauthorised use of their material, and are pursuing the infringements.
Point taken, I understand it but I believe it is abuse of "crown copyright" I can understand the RAF wishing to control the use of photos it has taken ON MISSIONS or OF FRONT LINE AIRCRAFT to me any photo taken of a historical aircraft kept in the RAF because it is a historical aircraft and photographed as such by a member of the RAF should automatically be in the public domain, Do they want us to celebrate this aircraft or not or would they like us to be controlled as to when where and how we celebrate it.
Walks away spitting and kicking the dog!
