Unless you obtain written permission
(in writing or via email)
you cannot
take a snapshot image of a website
or
logo online
to illustrate an article or blog post
Copyright of Pesky People / Enabled By Design
Today (13 July 2011) we were contacted by One Call Insurance who requested that we remove any visual images of their logo from two blog posts Refused car insurance because of Deafness and Update One Call Insurance refuses Deaf Driver Cover as it infringed their trademark logo.
We were unaware that this was infringement even though we had credited the image within the alt tag and added website links (as we had always done in posts).
I had to seek legal advice – Pesky People has very limited financial resources, is mostly voluntary and we are very lucky that we have some pro bono legal advice to assist us.
Pesky People highlights issues regarding digital discrimination faced by Disabled and Deaf people and our focus is to give Disabled and Deaf people a voice and help companies get it right to benefit all.
All of the guest posts offer the solution to the issues – to see an improvement in services that will benefit not just those involved – but everyone.
We live in a visual world, one where a picture is the most identifiable way of knowing a place, building, street, shop, company or product. That includes in blogs and articles online where pictures are used (including logos) to illustrate and add to the message.
This means that from now on we will be unable to use images to illustrate our posts and raises the question what we are we allowed to use?
Can we:
- Take photographs of a place which has a logo or image of the product clearly identified and use it?
- Photograph a letter and use it for illustration if it includes a company logo?
- Incude text written by someone else in an email that you have been copied into?
- Can we take pictures of buildings, venues, steps, equipment and use them in a blog post without the owners permission?
I dob’t think this is entirely correct. Under English law there is a concept of fair dealing, see s.30 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/part/I/chapter/III As you can see, criticism, review and news reporting is covered for.
Whoever has given you legal advice, are they familiar with copyright law? Because this looks like bad legal advice. As for the insurance company, they are just bullying. They should be making strides to address the issues, not throw red herrings in there. If they want to play such games, then I would be tempted just to do more than write about inacess.
Hi Alison
Thank you for the link it’s really helpful to read this.
I have to admit I’m still as confused as ever over the issue.
The advice came from a reputable law firm and I did ask regards how it is dealt with in reporting and was told the same applies – that I needed to seek permission to use the image.
I felt I had no choice but to remove the images and hopefully will find exactly where I stand even with crediting images properly (with alt tags and direct web links – until then …
Well, if that was the case then the BBC etc would never get any reporting done. I would show the law firm that clause, and tell them blogging is a form of news reporting. There is a distinct difference between passing off a logo vs. reporting a news issue. I almost feel like putting the logo on Grumpy Old Deafies to prove a point.
You have a good point but at mo I have to take their advice. I love Grumpy Old Deafies website by the way!