Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
Policies & Practices
>
Author Images
message 1:
by
Burris
(last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:21PM)
(new)
Sep 06, 2007 08:01AM

reply
|
flag


http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/a...
Some other links before I got to my answer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedi...
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum44...
http://legalminds.lp.findlaw.com/list...
http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/r...
http://www.kdla.ky.gov/libsupport/lib...
Seems like a perfect example of fair use to me (just as you and the article said).
Pictures of people, especially living people, are protected under additional laws, not just copyright. So fair use is not sufficient defense.
Pictures of people, especially living people, are protected under additional laws, not just copyright. So fair use is not sufficient defense.

Why?
Often, a cover shows a cover model. A real person's image, and his contract may have only licensed limited rights.
Therefore, if the cover model didn't agree that his bare chest (for instance) could adorn T-shirts, coffee mugs, pillow cases etc, then all sorts of people could be sued.
If the cover is a photograph, the photographer has rights, even if he took a picture of the Washington Monument... he still had artistic input in choice of lighting, shade etc.
So, ask.
:-)
"T-shirts, coffee mugs, pillow cases etc" are all commercial uses, and therefore fair use would not apply.

One would certainly think so, I agree, but technology has reached the point where almost anyone can lift an image onto their desktop, flip it, buy a pack of transfers from the local office supply shop, and create their own decorated items.
If they did not sell it, they might not define it as commercial. I've had conversations with people who honestly believe that if they can import it to their own desktop, it is theirs to use as they please.
Rowena

600x773
235x303
or a smaller 80x100 thumbnail size.


I also wrote to another author about a bio. He was also very good about getting back to me and giving me the information I requested. Took a bit longer, in this case, but he was recovering from surgery at the time.





Contracts for artwork should have a clause saying how they can be used, but they need to allow for reproduction of the *cover* for promotional purposes or the publisher/booksellers wouldn't be able to put it on their website, include it in promotioanl material etc. Note there is a difference here betwen the cover (image + other stuff) and the image by istelf. You might have the right to reproduce the cover but not the artwork by itself.
(Disclaimer, I'm not a lawyer and this stuff varies by country etc, but I spend too much time reading copright & contract sites and it starts to rub off. www.copyright.gov is the US site to start with, only it can get a bit heavy on the legalese in places.)

Because they have to defend the copyright on the photo or else lose it. Additionally, the picture rights may or may not belong to the author or the agent; many times it belongs to the photographer.

Yes, but this is rare. We've had complaints about photos, and also one complaint from a writer who wasn't given credit for writing an author biography (not his own). So if you are copy/pasting author bios from other sources, please make an attempt to find/cite the source at the bottom of the bio. Thanks for being so thorough, everyone!


Copyright law is based on the premise that not all information is equal. Also, pictures of living persons are not only protected by copyright law but also by privacy laws. At least in the US.

The former could get them sued and the second is protected by free speech. Also, any review that you think is inappropriate can be flagged for GR's review.

Paul wrote: "No no, I enjoy scurrilous and grossly insulting reviews! I've written a couple myself!"
What was your point again?
SF SQRL wrote: "A photo can be protected by law and still be information."
Of course. I never said it wasn't information. I said it was not only information.
What was your point again?
SF SQRL wrote: "A photo can be protected by law and still be information."
Of course. I never said it wasn't information. I said it was not only information.



SF SQRL wrote: "I'm no expert, but there's probably a difference between using the photo in context--ie if GR displayed the whole of the cover--and using the photo out of its context."
Pretty sure that is correct.
Pretty sure that is correct.




http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/....
If you haven't read it, you should, it's devastating. It may well have put many many people off reading that particular novel. I know it put me off. But the author can't complain about that. Then, consider a really pleasant photo of the author which a librarian puts onto Alice Sebold's profile. This is in order to render the author page more friendly and attractive, more human - it verges on promotion. But this act of niceness by Goodreads, this is the thing we're afraid the author or someone may possibly get annoyed about - even to the extent of suing! Alice can't sue us for saying she's the world's worst novelist but she can sue us for putting up a photo of her looking cool. You have to admit it's just a little bit topsyturvy.


What is safe to put in the book synopsis? I've mostly steered clear of it because I've never been sure.
Fair use is a bit murkier there. Pretty much any synopsis you write yourself would be protected by safe use; synopses from the book itself (back cover, inside flaps, etc.) are probably safe (but can actually be separately copyrighted).
I always figure that if I find it elsewhere on the net, on a large site (Google Books, Abe Books, Fantastic Fiction, etc.) that it's probably safe. Also, anything a author/publisher has asked us to put up (and there are quite a few of these) is fine. And GR has an agreement with Amazon, which has an agreement with many publishers -- that's where many of the summaries come from.
I always figure that if I find it elsewhere on the net, on a large site (Google Books, Abe Books, Fantastic Fiction, etc.) that it's probably safe. Also, anything a author/publisher has asked us to put up (and there are quite a few of these) is fine. And GR has an agreement with Amazon, which has an agreement with many publishers -- that's where many of the summaries come from.