Our response to the IPO consultation on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence

Back in December the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) launched a consultation on the use of copyright material for training AI models. They pointed out that this has presented new challenges for the UK’s copyright framework, and many rights holders (especially photographers) have found it difficult to exercise our rights in this context. They pointed out that it is important that copyright continues to support the UK’s world-leading creative industries and creates the conditions for AI innovation that allows them to share in the benefits of these new technologies.

This consultation sought views on proposals to deliver against the government’s objectives for this area, which are:

  • Boosting trust and transparency between sectors, by ensuring AI developers provide right holders with greater clarity about how they use their material.
  • Enhancing right holders’ control over whether or not their works are used to train AI models, and their ability to be paid for its use where they so wish.
  • Ensuring AI developers have access to high-quality material to train leading AI models in the UK and support innovation across the UK AI sector.

Thanks to a great deal of hard work from Board Member Andrew Wiard we have made a submission to the consultation which makes it clear that we, as photographers, have a lot to lose if the Government introduce an opt-out system for those wishing to not have their work used for creating AI models. We have pointed out that the current copyright laws, if enhanced and properly supported, offer rights holders the best chance of protection against widespread copyright theft that these AI models are employing.

If you’d like to read it, you can find The BPPA’s submission here

Surrey Police pay out after photographer Peter Macdiarmid brings civil claim for false arrest.

Back in September 2022 The BPPA posted a short piece on our website about the arrest on the 24th of August of multi-award winning photojournalist Peter Macdiarmid whilst covering a Just Stop Oil protest at Clacket Lane Services on the M25, south of London. He was handcuffed and detained for several hours by Surrey Police despite identifying himself as the holder of a UK Press Card.

The post reminded Police Officers that journalists have a right and a duty to report the news. Peter engaged the services of the law firm Bhatt Murphy who sent a letter of claim to Surrey Police. Eventually last December Surrey Constabulary offered to settle out of court, but they are not accepting liability and are refusing to apologise for their actions. The law firm acting on behalf of Surrey Police responded to Peter’s lawyers and denied that any of the Surrey officers did anything wrong, arguing that the situation that they found when they arrived was confusing and that they had acted within the law.

Peter said after the result: “I have been a news photographer for 37 years and have covered many events where tensions were running high and police were under great pressure, this Just Stop Oil protest was not like that – it was very calm and protesters were voluntarily giving themselves up for arrest when a police officer decided to detain me on suspicion of conspiracy to commit criminal damage. I was unable to persuade the arresting officer that I was a genuine working press photographer and my press card was ignored. Whilst I am glad to finally bring closure to this after many months, I am disappointed in the actions of Surrey police in handcuffing and arresting me and then dragging out the legal process during my civil claim. Another colleague was arrested in similar circumstances in December 2022 by Hertfordshire police whilst covering a climate protest, but after legal action was started the force very quickly admitted it ‘unlawfully arrested and violated the human rights of a photographer who was held while covering climate protests on the M25’ and the Chief Constable personally rang to apologise to the arrested photographer. The stark contrast between the actions of the two police forces is telling.”

Congratulations to Peter and his solicitors for their perseverance in pursuing this case – Handcuffing and arresting a press photographer is unacceptable behaviour by Surrey Police. We believe that the Police got it wrong on this occasion and that this is far from the first time this happened and it is likely to happen again. In the end Peter has received damages and his costs, but would rather have not had to go through a lengthy and stressful legal process to clear his name.

The BPPA 19/20 Chair’s Report

Despite the unforeseen global COVID19 pandemic and resulting negative effects on our industry, The BPPA have had yet another very busy and productive year with success in many projects, from an all-round stirling team effort by the BPPA’s elected Board members in what have been very challenging circumstances for us all. 

The Chair wishes to express his personal gratitude to all of our Board members for giving their time, often at very short notice in attending emergency online meetings and quickly adapting to an ever and fast-changing situation conducted with outstanding professionalism, commitment and teamwork. -As always. 

The projects that we undertook have not only given our ever-growing membership excellent value for money, they have also promoted the highest ethical, technical and creative standards from within the profession, raising awareness and appreciation from within our industry and outside it, in line with The BPPA ‘Mission Statement’. 

Below is a list of the Board’s activities and achievements throughout the year 19/20:

1. We’ve actively recruited Board members based in the regions to give our UK-wide membership confidence that we are representative of them with direct points of contact to the Board regionally. 

2. The BPPA’s Assignments 2019 exhibition was a stunning success story attracting thousands of visitors to three beautiful and unique galleries showing in London, Stoke-on-Trent and Bradford. Also, the introduction of guest speakers from within our membership has proven hugely successful with insightful and candid talks to big audiences during the exhibitions. So successful has Assignments been, our regular sponsors have very kindly offered increased funding for The BPPA to expand the Assignments exhibitions even further into hosting workshops and seminars creating information hubs for our members, those studying press photography and the general public to attend. 

3. We held a members’ vote on a proposal for a new level of Associate membership which had a huge vote in favour for. We now have a panel of Board members working on this project who’ve been liaising with a number of education establishments keen to work with us. Board members have already given talks to photojournalism students on their own work and that of The BPPA and continue to do so.

4. We attended the 2019 Picture Editors’ Guild Awards with our members. This event is an excellent networking evening for our organisation. 

5. The continuation of The BPPA’s ‘Spotlight’ series, highlighting the outstanding and diverse work of our membership through this online gallery. 

6. We hosted Assignments Live in London with a tribute to John Downing from his son Bryn and horse racing specialist Alan Crowhurst.

7. We invested corporate sponsorship in The BPPA co-creator’s John Downing book ‘Legacy’.

8. Through the organisation of the Snapperweb Christmas party raffle, The BPPA Board helped to raise a total of £2,816.00 for the National Autistic Society. 

9. We instituted discounted subscriptions on newspaper publications. 

10. We issued important guidance on the ‘Four Cs’ of metadata to coincide with Google’s Licensable Images.

11. We began work on a complete rebuild of the existing website which is currently ongoing.

12. We intervened in a number of issues relating to freedom of the press including; Downing Street pooling of images, assaults on press photographers during COVID19, private security and police abuse of powers, as well as News UK copyright grab contracts. These have included publication of official statements from The BPPA and interviews with media representatives. 

** Please note that the following points all relate to COVID19 and The Board’s work throughout the ongoing pandemic **

13. Outside of our monthly Board meetings, we held fortnightly online meetings specific to Covid19 as the situation was an ever-changing environment. The meetings have proven vital in quick Board decisions and for giving regular updates and useful resources to our members. This included the creation of a Covid19-specific resources webpage.

14. Despite a minor halt in production of press cards, our Membership Secretary and Secretary have done and continue to do an outstanding job of dealing with all new applications and press card renewals as the UKPCA press card became essential to being recognised key workers during the pandemic. 

15. We have given six months of payment holidays to our members suffering loss of work as a direct effect of Covid19.

16. We’ve built good working relationships with a host of organisations including; The National Union of Journalists, the Society of Editors, the Sports Journalists Association, the News Media Coalition, the Football Association, the Premier League, Football Data Co Ltd, the English Football League, Premiership Rugby and Premier League football clubs comms officers. It has been a pleasure working with everyone. 

17. Liaised with national football and rugby organisations from a variety of leagues in the creation of Pool C enabling not only members of The BPPA, but also non-member license holders to access ongoing Project Restart fixtures being played behind closed doors in stadia nationally. Countless hours of online meetings have been conducted both in consulting with our members and all relevant organisations and clubs in the creation and continued smooth operation of Pool C.

18. The BPPA Board conducted over 160 Premiership League Pool C draws during the 2019-2020 season finish, in addition to four Pool C draws for FA Cup semi finals and finals held at Wembley stadium played behind closed doors. All draws were announced before being conducted live on Zoom, with results posted on social media immediately afterwards to add transparency to all interested parties.

19. Through the work of The BPPA Board in representing the best interests of our members and of press photography, we have increased our membership number over the 19/20 year by 117 new members (and counting) which brings our total to 420 at the time of writing. The welcome additional funds will be reinvested in new innovative projects.

20. Fortunately the Covid19 pandemic never halted operations of The BPPA Board, we responded well in working together and already have more exciting projects currently in their planning stages for our members throughout 2021.

Thank you to those organisations who work with us, the Assignments speakers and most importantly, our membership for their continued confidence in The BPPA during these uncertain and challenging times.

Onwards and upwards for a brighter and successful 2021. 

Lindsey Parnaby

Chair
the BPPA

The BPPA and Pool C

Following the first round of matches after the resumption of English football, The British Press Photographers Association are delighted with the working relationship that they have created following the Premier League’s launch of Operation Restart.


The BPPA board have been instrumental in securing positions for the smaller agencies and freelancers across the UK proportionate to access given to the newswires and publication positions.


Before we undertook the project there was no Pool C – which meant no access for those outside of the national and international agencies and newspapers.


The goal we set out in gaining positions was achieved and in continuance with fairness for all and to be representative of the whole industry. Members took a vote on a random draw system with the majority voting in favour of the draw.


The board undertook a huge juggling act adhering to the Premier League and individual club requests, whilst supporting sports photographers at their time of need during a global pandemic which brought much of our industry to its knees.

New relationships have been forged as a result of this process and The BPPA are now in constant communication with the Premier League, Data Co Ltd, the English Football League as well as press officers at the majority of the member clubs.

This is a positive step forward for our association. We welcome the new relationships that we have formed as a result of our involvement with Operation Restart with the clubs and league now approaching and involving us is a huge leap forward for The BPPA.

This temporary ‘working solution’, albeit not ideal for everyone, is as fair as it can be and ensures that the match access opportunities for the smaller agencies are distributed on an rota basis. We have worked hard with the individual clubs to find a common ground which means that access is offered to all license holders.

The BPPA are happy to continue operating this draw system on behalf of photographers and the individual clubs and we would ask that all Data Co Ltd licence holders applying for games respect the process in place.
Positive feedback from club press officers has been very encouraging for The BPPA and we request that anyone who has any concerns with the accreditation process speak to us directly rather than the clubs as they have been inundated with calls from photographers.

Covid-19 has placed a massive amount of pressure on everyone in the industry and we are happy to work with you all to make as positive an outcome as possible for everyone in our industry.


The BPPA is an organisation that prides itself on ethics, professionalism and camaraderie for every one of our colleagues.

To see the latest news about the EPL Draws please visit the Facebook Page that we have set up to keep those interested in touch.

Downing Street and the curtailment of press freedom

Photo: © Lindsey Parnaby


The British Press Photographers’ Association objects to any and all attempts by Government to exclude photographers, reporters and television from events where there is a reasonable expectation from the public that those events would be covered by independent witnesses on their behalf. 

Restricting access and replacing independent coverage with free images, copy and footage from special advisers, Government employees and heavily vetted individuals is wrong and represents a serious assault on our free media. Once any organisation and especially the Government has full control of the news and how it is reported then the perception of accuracy, trust and accountability will all suffer and democracy will be the ultimate casualty.

We ask that any and all plans to limit and eliminate the access of the news media to Government events be scrapped and that the system that guarantees the access of journalists becomes a bedrock of the relationship between the Government and the people of this country.

(Photo ©Lindsey Parnaby)

Quis custodiet IPSOs custodes?

That’s the Mail Online brush-off, saying after publishing Rebecca Reid’s profile picture without either permission or payment, that by making her picture ‘public and discoverable’ she has posted it ‘into the public domain’. This is arrant nonsense. The public domain has a very specific meaning in copyright law, indicating that copyright has either been forfeited or expired, and in UK law it does not expire until seventy years after the creator’s death. Until then publication requires permission and payment. As any editor knows. Including the character who ran an ( erroneous, © Twitter ) copyright notice under the published picture! Which, incidentally, has now been taken down ( we have the screengrab ), replaced with a grab of her twitter feed.

The charitable explanation for this misleading and misinformed policy painting an inaccurate picture of the law is that the writer genuinely believes it, in which case she really should not be holding any senior editorial position on a national newspaper, let alone responsibility for ‘compliance’. And she also seems unaware of the Mail Online’s own House Rules for comments

“You must not insert links to websites (URLs) or submit content which would be an infringement of copyright” (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-1388145/House-Rules.html )

The alternative is that the Mail Online, guilty of copyright infringement ( yet again ), instead of owning up and paying up is trying to avoid the consequences with pseudo legal twaddle. If so not a bright idea to try that on with the Digital Editor of Grazia.

But there’s more. It get’s worse. This is what the  Independent Press Standards Organisation, IPSO, which regulates most nationals including the Daily  Mail ( though not the Mail Online ) tells the public, most of whom will not be as clued up as Rebecca Reid:

“Journalists are normally allowed to publish photos, comments and information from social media profiles, forums or blogs if there are no privacy settings protecting them and they do not show anything private” (https://www.ipso.co.uk/media/1510/social-media-public.pdf ).

This is quite simply not true. Publishing without permission photos “from social media profiles, forums or blogs if there are no privacy settings”   is in flagrant breach of the law. The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988. And also in defiance of their very own Editors’ Code,  Point 1, Accuracy: “ The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information….”

Piracy with the blessing of IPSO!  Quis custodiet IPSOs custodes?
The answer to which is the law of the land. Which is also the last resort of creators. Photographers can and do extract payment for copyright infringement from the Mail Online. But, why, why, why do we have to deal with the lawlessness of national papers, and IPSO advice as baseless as that Mail Online reply to Rebecca Reid?

EU Copyright Directive to be debated in European Parliament

Tomorrow (26th March 2019) MEPs will vote on a controversial EU directive to copyright work used on the web. It sets terms and conditions for others to reuse content (posted by people like us) commercially.
The battle has been between the tech giants, whose business model is all about reusing other’s intellectual property without license or renumeration, and us ‘the creative community’.
Scares have included that ‘readers will be unable to share links’ (wrong) or ‘Wikipedia will collapse’ (nonsense). Many of us have had content stolen by others to market their photographic services from our clients’ own media sites, and now Publishers’ Right (Article II) in the directive will allow us to chase our payment, which should stop many thefts. It should allow a revenue stream that before was tricky to say the least.
As Angela Mills Wade, the director of the European Publishers Council is quoted, “a vote for the directive will be a vote for fairness, for culture, for creativity, and crucially, for the future of Europe’s professional, diverse independent press.”

Alamy – a follow-up

The UK Press Gazette quoted The BPPA’s open letter to Alamy’s CEO in their piece about his video signalling his intention to reduce the photographers percentage of royalties to 40%. This morning the UKPG asked us to provide a response to James West’s latest video where he offers to keep the 50% split for exclusive content. We provided the following text:
 
“Alamy’s move to alter their commission structure has brought a large number of other issues to the surface such as the low prices they sell pictures for, their broken promise that when they reduced the photographers cut to 50% they wouldn’t go further and their somewhat grudging acceptance that it is the commitment and buy-in from thousands of photographers that has got them to the positive position in which they now find themselves.
 
The BPPA welcomes Alamy’s decision to reconsider their reduction in the percentage paid to photographers but in making this only for exclusive content they are still going to anger many of our members. One of them has said “exclusivity is appropriate to a delicatessen, not a Walmart” and this sums up how most feel.
 
Should they push ahead with this plan the details of how they manage this will be complex. Will photographers have to make some sort of declaration for every single picture retrospectively? Will the burden for proving exclusivity rest with the photographers? Our opinion is that Alamy are still not listening and are still cutting the income of all those photographers who for very good reasons do not wish to, or cannot, surrender exclusivity.”