BlogU

  • Intellectual Property

    By Oronte July 8, 2009 1:40 am

    I have no budget for photos or illustrations for this nonfiction project I’m working on, and I don’t qualify for subventions—departmental, college, or campus subsidies—since it’s for a general readership and isn’t a peer-reviewed work of scholarship. I’m trying to work smart, but sometimes it means making hard choices over things I’d really like to include.

    Most of all it’s been surprising how widely rates and policies vary, at different institutions, for the use of archival images. I’ve been to archives at the town library, the county historical association, the Lincoln Presidential Library, the Chicago History Museum, Southern Illinois University, the Illinois State Geological Survey, and the Southern Illinoisan newspaper (who are excellent and handsome people). I’ve accessed several collections online, such as the ones at the Library of Congress’ Prints and Photographs Division, and the Smithsonian American Art Museum. And I’ve queried a number of private collectors, photographers, and newspapers with closed archives, such as the Chicago Tribune.

    What it’s taught me is that intellectual property rights are an utter mess—a sort of land-grab—as if recent worries over course packets and Michael Jackson’s will didn’t make that clear already.

    Some places allow me to bring in a scanner and make my own digital files; others make their own files or prints. Some places charge a flat fee for researching and reproduction together; some charge nothing and have my eternal thanks. Others charge a stiff research fee—in some cases for literally just walking back to get a folder—as well as graduated licensing fees based on print runs, interior versus cover use, the kind of media, etc. When I add up costs, I sometimes find that using a desired image is prohibitive, even though there are no licensing fees for its use.

    Library of Congress images can be like that. When LoC made its first attempt at digitizing, the government contractor didn’t always scan the photos at what we would now consider high resolution. Of course subsequent re-digitization of those files (to prevent degradation) could never get any better. If I want a pic at a resolution acceptable for printing in a book, I have to request that someone go into a hanger at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, where the original negatives for these call numbers are now stored, retrieve it, make a print, and ship it to me.

    Just to be clear, what I’m asking to look at and possibly use is, with a few exceptions, old enough to be copyright-free; even when it's not, the photographer is long-dead and often unknown, the companies involved long-defunct, the subjects and their descendants gone. Often there are multiple copies of an image in several archives. I’m okay with paying a small tax, in effect, for using one collection’s version of an image, if it helps them keep an archivist employed and the image well- preserved. The Chicago History Museum, which recently aided the production team of the movie Public Enemies, is reasonable about their fees. But I do the slow burn of the helpless when some big-city paper wants to charge $300 for the use of a small image, plus a $100 research fee, plus an overpriced rate for a quick scan, plus shipping, for something that ran decades ago with an article that no one will ever see again in any other form. Knowing that the big-city paper’s corporate parent filed for bankruptcy protection recently and is in need of a little cash doesn’t help either.

    I was thinking of the recent unpleasantness over intellectual rights to James Joyce’s work, and that made me think back to when I was at University of Miami, a good Joyce school if ever 'twere one, when I think they felt the pinch of trying to quote him in their scholarship. I suppose if you were Joyce’s grandson—named Stephen, of all things—you might feel cheated if you got locked out completely, though I hate the idea of family members trying to use their inheritance to control how their writer-relatives are perceived. But did you know the President and Fellows of Harvard College own heirless Emily Dickinson, who died 123 years ago? They do: I paid them to use one of her poems in my novel. (They own her to the extent that they published the definitive volume of her work, free of meddlesome edits and omissions by well-meaning family, recently enough that copyright is still in effect.)

    And I don’t know what the hell this is having to do with one of my heroes, but it appears not to be a joke. Look at their client list and you may find other heroes of your own represented.

    Crazy Larry, who went with me to serve as Scanner Monkey on a two-day run recently, says most collectors don’t even know what they have yet, what’s it worth, or whether it’s actually worthless. I’m not taking any chances. I’m copyrighting all the images of my children. If they want to see them in the future, they’ll have to go through my archive editor and pay pay pay….

    Photo: Mark Twain, from Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division.

Advertisement

Comments on Intellectual Property

  • those licensing fees for photos and other images...
  • Posted by Jan Bone , adjunct faculty, English composition at Harper College and Roosevelt University on July 8, 2009 at 8:45am EDT
  • You haven't made it clear to readers--at least, I'm confused--as to the nature of this non-fiction project you're working on for general readership. Is it a job you've undertaken for your institution? Is it a research project you intend to self-publish or sell on the open market? Is its primary end-use educational (possibly as a supplementary resource assigned in a course), or commercial (on sale at Borders or Barnes and Noble?)?

    It sounds as if you're doing the right things--getting permission, paying requested fees, etc.--but just unhappy about the need to do so, or the need to fund these requirements from your own pocket. If I'm understanding you and that is the case, then your basic problem stems from your original negotiations on who's publishing this project,,,your university press? You yourself? and from not thinking through in advance the implications of those decisions.

    For this project, you probably have to keep going as you've started, copyright laws being what they are. For your next project similkar to this one, do some preparation before committing. Usually the state or local bar association can arrange a free or low-cost consultation for 30 minutes with an attorey who specializes in the area in which you want help--in your case, someone up-to-date on laws about intellectial property. Go into that consultation with targeted questions, rather than a haranging beef about your frustrations. Are there ways in which you can shape the production or distribution of your next project that will cut costs? For my first book (I co-authored a film studies text--1976 publication--that's still in print and being sold) we negotiated a publisher share-the-cost 50/50 on such fees, with the publisher upfronting all of them. Result, no cash outlay for this from authors..

    Another plan is to cut the number of illustrations. How vital is it that this project have as many as you seem to be choosing? Will your reader care? Will it affect the sale or distribution or use of the book if you cut down? Can you base some of your chapters or text on different information or a choice of different images that can be found more economically? Does it matter if a photo of Billy the Kid or Wyatt Earp or whoever is in the book or whether the reader sees a back-to-the-camera or unrecognizable western outlaw holding a hostage? Are you using static, portrait-like pictures of known individ-uals or varying your choice of illustrations (will be more interesting, probably, if you do the latter.) If descriptions are important, can you cover them in quoted--with attribution and permission--text, rather than feeling you need to include a portrait shot?

    Can you - for your next project- go for a grant, negotiate fees with the licensing institution, use fewer or cheaper illustrations and get the important points across by writing more-comprehensive, targeted text instead of so many images? Plan and choose images for lowest production costs? Hook up with a low-cost graphic assistant who knows photography and reproduction techniques better than you do?

    Put it this way. Will the sales, distribution, and use of your current project hinge a great deal on your including all these desired photos--and if you're doing this to earn money, what's your max out-of-pocket-spending personal budget for this aspect of the project? Better, more pre-planning on a second project, especially in view of the potentially limited market for what you are undertaking. Good luck, but think things through better than it sounds as if you have, for what you are attempting now to accomplish. Jan Bone, co-author of one such book (5th ed now) and author of 7 more non-fiction books still currently in print, and an adjunct in English comp at both a university and a community college.

  • publishing in the 21st century
  • Posted by Lisa Bayer at University of Illinois Press on July 9, 2009 at 10:30am EDT
  • I happen to know what project Oronte is working on (though he is not publishing this book with my press), and illustrations of the sort he is seeking are absolutely vital to its success in the marketplace. A book contract signed in 1976 is hardly comparable to any aspect of publishing today. Many publishers require authors to pay permissions. We ask our authors to pay for their indexes. Some presses ask authors to pay for proofreading. Slim-to-nonexistent margins have changed the game in every way.

    Thanks for illuminating the vagaries of the intellectual property quest so nicely, Oronte.

  • Posted by kgotthardt on July 9, 2009 at 12:30pm EDT
  • Did you have to pay for the photo of Mark Twain?

    I recently self-published a book of Civil War related poems and used LOC web-accessible, archived photos. When I say "web accessible," I mean they literally are all over the web. I figured I was safe unless some long-lost heir dings all of us. I also figured I was safe because these images are in park literature, in visitors' centers and generally free for viewing.

    I can't imagine scanning things and/or paying for images from newspapers when I earn $2 per book sale and can't really even afford to buy my own book.

    If I am wrong about my usage, I suppose I will have to pay $1 of my enormous royalty per book. That would be too bad, because my ultimate goal is to earn a little cash and donate some back to the parks. Hopefully, the long-lost heirs won't come back to life and demand my $1. If they do, I will pay them what I have made and just come out with my second edition, complete with all of my own photos which are also included in my book.

    This is a shameless plug. Get your keepsake edition of Poems from the Battlefield today at http://stores.lulu.com/kgotthardt.

  • "I’m copyrighting all the images of my children"
  • Posted by Peter on July 9, 2009 at 4:30pm EDT
  • You wrote "I’m copyrighting all the images of my children." Of course the problem is that as soon as you take a photograph, it is copyrighted - you don't have to do anything else. Turn over the copyright to someone other than your children, and they will have to pay. Of course, you will have to have model releases from them in order to be able to use the photos yourself...

    This is a system no sane person could ever have implemented.

  • Understand your pain
  • Posted by IllinoisHistory at IllinoisHistory.com on July 24, 2009 at 6:00pm EDT
  • You obviously have been talking to the Chicago Tribune. I've recently found that they the highest I've encountered for rights. It's utterly ridiculous.