Written evidence submitted by Deborah Padfield

I am a free-lance visual artist specialising in photography and inter-disciplinary practice and research within Fine Art and Medicine.  Collaborating with Dr Charles Pither and chronic pain patients from St Thomas' Hospital, I pioneered the use of photographic images within pain consultations to help improve doctor-patient dialogue. The resultant exhibition, Perceptions of Pain, was shown widely in London, toured nationally, published as a book1 and gave rise to further research, including a pilot study within NHS pain clinics.2

Currently I hold an artist’s residency at UCLH3 collaborating with Professor Joanna Zakrzewska and the facial pain team investigating the photograph and the portrait as a mediating space between patient and clinician. The results of the residency and face2face project have been shown at the Menier Gallery and UCH Hospital Street Gallery, London from July – September 2011. I also work as a free-lance photographer and exhibit and lecture nationally and internationally. My work is reproduced, featured and written about critically in numerous publications. I am a PhD Candidate at the Slade School of Fine Art and a full professional member of the AOP.

Much of my income therefore is derived from reproduction fees for the use of my images. The funding available for the creation of most of my work, barely covers the expenses incurred during their production and research period – which can be extensive - so the income generated by reproduction fees is absolutely essential to my financial survival. Most organisations wishing to use the images have no idea of the time that goes into producing and working on them or the rigorous research process and negotiations necessary on the way. They also appear to have little understanding of the difference between owning physical prints and owning the copyright. It would be very helpful if this difference were clarified for companies and buyers and the need for artists to retain copyright emphasised.

As I work predominantly within the health sector I also have an additional need to retain control over how and where my images/photographs are used in order to protect both the subjects and the spirit and integrity of the projects; some of the material within them is of a very personal and sensitive nature and needs to be shown in an appropriate context. If I do not retain copyright I cannot control where or how they are shown.

I have had numerous protracted negotiations with various educational, pharmaceutical, and health service providing organisations where I have had to outline repeatedly the difference between owning the work as in the hard copy of the print and owning copyright, and that the latter needs to remain with the artist even when the physical print is bought. In some cases I have had to deny use of reproductions of the images as the companies concerned could not adapt their contracts to protect copyright on the images from being granted to any future third parties who might buy their journal or in one case an e-learning module ie they had no means within their existing contracts of allowing the copyright to remain with the artist, in this case me. With business arms of educational institutions and within the health service it is becoming more and more difficult to protect ones ownership of copyright so that if a particular journal or on-line module is re-sold then the artist retains control of the copyright of their images. Once copyright is no longer owned by the artist the images can turn up in any context, be used in anyway, modified in any way and used as many times as an organisation wants without the artist having any control over it or receiving any payment for it. It is imperative that it is as simple as possible for copyright to automatically be granted to the artist who makes the work/photograph and that their need to retain copyright is asserted. Otherwise many photographers cannot continue to function and to earn. As a sector we bring a lot of income to the country in the form of services and skills we both provide and pay for so energising the economy as well as in tax and in our contribution to the reputation the UK has for its thriving creative sector. If artists are not supported and continue to go out of business, this sector will lose its energy and diminish. I believe this will diminish all our lives.

I have also had countless occurrences where my photographs have turned up being used/reproduced by someone without permission, many of which I am sure I still am not aware of, as it is usually someone else noticing an images somewhere that brings it to my attention. If challenged, organisations frequently claim ignorance of the fact that they are breaching copyright law. Please do not make the lives of artists/photographers any more difficult for creative professionals by allowing commercial use of orphan works as there has been no proven need for this, or by recommending that artists have to register their work to obtain ownership of its copyright. It is a breach of their human rights for artists not to own their own copyright automatically on work they create. In a digital age it is getting increasingly difficult to spend time and resources, which many of us don’t have, policing the internet for illegal reproduction of our images, ie without payment or permission. This is not always done knowingly, it occasionally happens through ignorance. It needs to be absolutely clear and general knowledge that it is an offence to remove metadata from a digital image, or publish a digital image in electronic form (website, DVD, etc) without metadata attached and without having obtained written permission and where appropriate payment of the required fees. Not getting permission for their use or paying for the use of images is exactly the same as breaking in and stealing piece of property such as a TV set, though exacting a larger toll on an artists income and ability to continue practicing. More education and guidance needs to be given to organisations who regularly use and reproduce artistic works and photographs so that all staff understand that to use an artist’s image without permission is an infringement of their rights, is illegal and in the long term reduces artists’ ability to carry out their profession so having a detrimental affect on work available for use.

I am very concerned about any changes to the copyright law which would mean that artists do not automatically own the copyright on images and work they produce as it would dramatically reduce their earning power in an already extraordinarily difficult financial climate. I am equally concerned about anything which would make it harder for us to enforce compliance with copyright and IP law by those who use our images as for the most part we have limited financial resources to pursue those who do so illegally. The creative sector intersects with many other areas and structures of our lives, our research our educational and social endeavours and our health and well-being. If we lose or marginalise this sector and destroy its potential to contribute to our society our research and our economy, we all lose.

Please would you take these submissions seriously, they are heartfelt. Thank you.