Jane Austins' Relatives Album & Photo Copyright

Question

An album hopefully containing 19th century aristocrats turn out to be a treasure of pictures of the family of Jane Austen. The question I have is, since these photos have appeared in a newspaper, where is the copyright? And, if so, when or if it will expire? No, it shows no pictures of Jane.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6580879/Extraordinary-photos-Jane-Austens-family-discovered.html

Answer 1

The following was found on a UK website and deals with copyright photographs taken in the UK:

https://www.copyrightaid.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2312

Re: 1901 family photograph - OK to publish?

Post by AndyJ » Tue Mar 06, 2018 4:28 pm

Hi rmlaws,

You are free to use the photograph as you wish. Firstly, under the 1911 Copyright Act, all photographs whether published or not, had a fixed copyright term of 50 years from the date they were made (ie the photograph was taken). Hence copyright in your particular photograph would have ended on 31 December 1951.

Furthermore, another provision in the same Act (section 5(a)), said that where a person commissioned the taking of the photograph, that person would be the owner of the resulting copyright unless there was some express provision to the contrary. Thus in all probability, one of your family members who paid for the sitting will have owned the copyright, which by the normal laws of inheritance would have passed down through to his or her heirs, until it expired in 1952..

Comments

That opens a whole kettle of worms regarding the Jane Austin Family Album. The photos were obviously taken in England, therefore UK law applies.

Does that now mean that we are free to use the ones in the newspaper as we wish on Wikitree? It sounds like it to me.

Answer 2

(Disclaimer - I don't know much about UK copyright law, I'm a librarian and I've just done some Googling).

The pictures are all marked as being copyright Karen Levers - the person who bought the album. I don't think that would be right - creating a digital image of an old photo doesn't transfer the copyright to you. The copyright should belong to the heirs of the person who took the photographs, or possibly the heirs of the people who commissioned them (unless the eBay auction included that she was purchasing the copyright of the images as well), so she's probably in breach of copyright by publishing them. If it's impossible to figure out who the copyright holder is, the photo is classed as an orphan work and there's a licence you can apply for in order to use it.

Copyright on photos taken before 1989 that were never published used to be perpetual, but now expire in August 2039. :'-( Publication might change that, but I doubt that the Daily Mail's publication will affect it since it doesn't look like they have the permission of the actual copyright holder.

See also:

* Step-by-step guide to copyright in images online
* Copyright notice: digital images, photographs and the internet

Comments

That's good enough to know that we can't use the images from the newspaper for use on WikiTree, IF the photos had been taken in the USA. Thank you..... On second thought what would happen if we applied for the copyright?

---

I believe they are out of copyright.
Some discussion here relates to photograph copyright:
https://www.copyrightaid.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1067