Written evidence submitted by Tim Motion

I submit that the creative industry which contributes at least 5% (?) of UK GDP is being largely ignored and is not taken seriously as a valuable asset and tax provider for the UK economy – particularly small businesses and creative individual operators

The over-riding principle is this: In the normal marketplace goods and services are displayed for sale, hire or usage license in return for a stated price – the cost of goods and services. If the goods and services are taken and used without payment it constitutes theft.

There appear to be no punitive sanctions in law against infringement of photographic copyright and the Moral Right to attribution.

In the present digital age photographs can be distributed throughout the world almost instantaneously. Even if the photographs contain METADATA, i.e. the IPTC - details of the creator, description and statement of copyright - this information can be stripped out, thus creating ORPHAN WORKS. This is certainly the case with photographs uploaded to online entities such as Facebook. These works can then be used for free unless the ‘creator’ can be identified through a search with ‘due diligence’. Realistically the latter is unlikely to take place as it is time-consuming and expensive, certainly for a large corporation where usage of images runs into millions.

As a result the creator does not get paid and as his or her income declines they are less and less likely to be able to contribute purchasing power and tax to the UK economy.

The posited return of Clause 43 within the Digital Economy Bill by interested parties will impoverish the creators and benefit large corporations and multinational companies who make use of the creators’ work. This is especially pertinent in the case of individual creators of illustration, photography and musical works.

Clause 43 was thankfully deleted from the Digital Economy Bill as being poorly thought through and prejudicial to the creative industry as a whole and individuals and small organisations. This is especially relevant to the retention of Copyright by the creator/artist/illustrator/photographer/writer/musician enshrined in the Copyright Act of 1988 and the Moral Right to be attributed as the creator of the work – without question.

It must be possible to setup some form of economically viable image registration – in particular for digital works, old and new, placed on websites and the internet.

1. Funding could be made available to aid research into stronger, universal software to input and maintain robust metadata into all types of digital image formats.

2. A punitive element be introduced into copyright legislation to deter infringements, particularly in the digital domain.

3. An effective and affordable legal remedy with easy access be made

available in the format of a copyright small claims court.

4. Mandatory copyright education in schools and Further Education/ Higher Education establishments

Either way the principle of the creator’s Copyright and Right to Attribution must be retained as sacrosanct.

· As a professional photographer I make a significant proportion of my income from licensing fees for the Intellectual Property (Photographic Images) that I create and own.

· If my printed work is copied or my digital images are stripped of identifying data (the METADATA) it becomes an ORPHAN WORK usable by anybody for free. I therefore have no income.

· I attach a few photographs as examples of infringements of my own copyright material. This constitutes a very small part of such activity worldwide.

· These represent only two infringements that I happen to have discovered by chance. The potential for further theft and misuse without attribution or payment is vast.

THEFT OF IMAGES: EXAMPLES OF INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT [WITHOUT ACCREDITATION OR PAYMENT]

CD Cover for Sonny Rollins SCOOP.

ñ Reproduced on the card box-cover,

ñ On the front of the CD box,

ñ On the CD itself,

ñ On the inside back of CD box (reversed):

ñ This equals four usages, with Worldwide distribution including Japan.

ñ NO CREDIT, NO PAYMENT.

I sent an Invoice to the Distributor in Germany but the letter was returned ‘Addressee unknown’. The picture could have been copied from a book, exhibition programme or magazine.

Album Fotografico (Brazil).

Found on a general marketing/networking website, this ‘album’ reproduced no less than THIRTY images of musicians copied directly from my book "Jazz Portraits – An Eye for the Sound". I was unable to contact the owners of the site; there was no email address. NO CREDIT, NO PAYMENT.

The lost revenue to me would amount to about £2,000.

5 September 2011