Warbird Information Exchange

I don't know if anybody has looked into permissions from Boeing, Lockheed, Smithsonian, etc., to use images for books or articles. You have to jump through hoops and some charge $100 for each image if the publication exceeds, lets say, 5000 copies.
This bars most writers, because of cost vs. publishing advances to the writer from using such images even if they are paramount to the story. From what I've read on the sites, even such terms...okay, I hope I'm not breaking copyright law, F-14 and F-16 are trademarks/copywrited. If anybody from those organizations can explain the reasoning behind this policy please do so.

There was a post on here a while back about the F-14/F-16 copyright issue. I may be wrong, but there was a law that went through Congress that basically said that once the US GOVT pays for it, the taxpayers own it. Hence the F-14 etc can't be copyrighted.

HOWEVER, the pictures belong to Lockheed, etc. AS does any of their artwork, etc..........

Question, do they give anytype of dicsounts for MULTIPLE PICTURES?

I can see where its getting tough in the defense industry, at $100mill+ a pop on the F-22, its hard to make a buck. (So far they only delivered 100 with 300 more to come) But really, the $100 a pic probably doesn't come close to trying to cover the contractor's cost of trying to track a single picture. I can understand it.

Mark H

Well, The corporations are still posting that, for commercial purposes, you can't use F-14, F-16, etc., without their permission. Also, those organizations mentioned are asking $100 for one use only for images.

OK. It's a big area and it takes skill to navigate. The playing field's changing too.

First: There's a difference between buying reproduction rights and copyright. If I have a copy of a photo from (say) W.W.II that's also in the Boeing archives or Smithsonian, I don't have to pay them a cent. If I get a copy from them of the same photo, then we enter a contact, and they can require payments for reproduction. Boeing are on thin ice if they are demanding payment for a photo originally issued free of charge for publicity.

Second: There's no such thing as 'copywrite'. It's copyright, and it varies from country to country. There's a good deal of worthwhile advice on the web, beware of the obviously low rent stuff.

Third: It's often possible to strike a deal with some institutions for photo use, based on the aim of the publication. Are you really expecting to sell 5,000 copies of a book? Look low numbers and low costs, and plug the not looking for profit but telling the story angle.

Fourth: Be precise - Any company 'owns' its name - 'Boeing', 'Lockheed' etc. If you are describing a Boeing product, and not representing a copy as an original you are generally OK. Boeing got into a mess recently trying to show that 1/144 scale models of the Boeing 747 were 'copies' of the original, and the kit manufacturers went around the houses with this, ending up with ridiculous 'tm' on some toys and models by the company names. AFAIK, this doesn't apply to publications.

'747' describing the airliner 'belongs' to Boeing, as does 'Eagle' when referring to the F-15. However, as the US government allocates the designations, I doubt they can copyright 'F-15' specifically.

Drop me a PM, and I may be able to help with some further specifics.

Regards,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

If I may add my two-cents here... It's ironic this subject came up for a couple of reasons; 1) because not long ago there was some talk on another forum about Boeing trying to charge someone for using "P-51 Mustang" and putting the NAA logo on a model box. Now, I don't know how true and/or accurate that discussion was, but it irritated a lot of folks because it seems as if Boeing is stating they have rights to any and all things even ancestrally (?) related to them. This may be so--I'm not any kind of legal eagle at all--crap-house lawyer at best! LOL. Anyway, apparently, it caused some kind of stir. The second reason I find it ironic is because just the other day I was searching the Boeing site for pictures and, after the questionaire one must fill out regarding usage, the search quoted me a price of $350 USD PER IMAGE! I'd like a pound of whatever they're smokin! I could sell that stuff and then I COULD afford to buy their pictures! After snooping around on the web some more, I found several other sites with the same WW2-era pictures (read: long before Boeing even thought of buying North American Aviation) for much more reasonable rates--and those rates were based on resolution/copying prices--not "copyright." A look at many of these other sites also show those photos as having been originally taken by "USAAC" or "USAAF" etc photographers--not NAA or Boeing. Hmm, interesting. If I understand correctly (and I think this point was made earlier in this thread) if a picture was taken by a government employee in the line of duty (or, for civilian employees, in their official capacity), then that image is considered to be in the public domain and therefore, no specific entity can claim copyright status on that. Personally, it smacks of them (Boeing) tryng to capitalize and make a quick buck on work that isn't theirs on the pretense of it having come from one of their acquisitions. One thing to consider (and this is what I am doing) is getting copies from archives such as NASM, NMUSAF, or AFHRA. My opinion (and we all know what opinions are worth) is that Boeing has had some hot-shot "bean-counter" that is trying to make a name and coming up with some arbitrary non-sense that seems like a money-maker hoping to play on the general public's ignorance of the actual rules. If it sounds official and has even the slightest bit of "enforcement" added, then it presents the illusion of fact, when the reality is that it is not. I say dig deeper--I plan to.




Jim

$100 per image is cheap if you take a look at what Getty images is charging for image use. Being a photographer myself, I think it is fair to get paid for your work, even if it is just for fun or what have you. BUT, I don't think it's fair to break someone's bank account to get compensated for an image or 2.

While Boeing, Lockheed and other may have images that they are selling that were taken by company photographers that they may actually have the rights to, there are thousands (maybe millions) of other photos that are equally good or better by people in the private sector. If you are looking for pictures for a book, there are photographers that are willing to assist with photos for little to no cost, depending on the circumstances.

For historic photos of WWII era aircraft, you can use the National Archives. Another resource for photos of that era are to contact the individual fighter or bomber group associations. Most of them have websites. Associations may also get you pictures that have never been seen before by members that have their own private collections of snapshots. If you look at web-birds.com, he has quite an extensive web collection of photos of that era. Some of those won't been seen anywhere else.

Good points VG.

Indeed. I don't think any of us working on (say) W.W.II aircraft publications are talking bread from working photographers or their agencies. Basically, there's a big difference between a shot from a photo agency or a current working photographer, and an archival photo that's primarily of historic interest.

Recently I had occasion to need to get a specific, unique, famous warbird shot, and the photographer was represented by a big agency. I couldn't cut a deal with them that the journal's costs could cover, but I did manage to get to the photographer, who was happy to do a deal which suited us both; better than not using his photo. This isn't always possible, but it never hurts to ask; although time and contacts can cramp that too.

One issue is corporate lawyers are looking to make sure any 'company' monies come to the company. Most fingerless-gloved historians are below their financial interest.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Getty has some great AVG images but want arounds $700 (if I remember correctly)
even if just for your personal enjoyment.
If your looking for National Archive Images of WWII I sell them for $4.00 on ebay not
$400.00 but most are WWII military combat airctaft .
My handle is jcook1963
Jack the shameless self promoter

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!

I've been purchasing/copying photos from the NARA, Navy, Marine Corps, etc., for years. I decided to visit the above mentioned corporation/organization sites to see whether they offered images/technical drawings of historical aircraft and compare their inventory/cost with that of the NARA and military. I was just shocked to see the requirements/cost of purchasing them. Even at $50 a pop that's too much. Private vendors typically charge around $20 for copying images from the NARA. Ah, for the good old days when I could purchase copy negatives for $5.
When private individuals request images from me for personal or commercial use I provide them for free. For commercial use all I request is a citation. Sorry about the spelling in previous posts on this thread. It was late at night.

Here's one of the best sites I've found:

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/fsachtml/fsowhome.html

The aviation stuff is somewhat limited but there are some real gems. The color photos are huge, hi-res files and mostly public domain.

_________________
http://www.disrudstudios.com

I wish it was a bit easier to search...

Check this one out - the caption says:
"Aircraft. Army. A Flying Fortress (B-17) bomber discharging a bomb on an enemy target. The Flying Fortress, recognized as one of the outstanding planes of the war, has performed with great credit in the South Pacific, over Germany and elsewhere. It has proved its ability to fight off enemy aircraft as well as to inflict and absorb punishment on."

I think it's something far more interesting (considering it's rarity)...



Ryan

_________________
Aerial Photographer with Red Wing Aerial Photography currently based at KRBD and tailwheel CFI.
Websites: Texas Tailwheel Flight Training, DoolittleRaid.com and Lbirds.com.

The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but safety is of the LORD. - Prov. 21:31 - Train, Practice, Trust.

Yeah, I've sucked my teeth over some pricing systems. But I've generally managed to work around them.

And that's generally the case with private individuals. I've had tons of help from people around the world, usually for a copy and a credit. It makes a lot of publications possible that otherwise wouldn't happen.

No issue over spelling; I'm not going to throw stones on that! It's what printers called a 'literal' where one word substitutes for another ('their' and 'there' being a famous example) and it's come up several times on WIX, so I pointed it out as it's a red herring; you'll find lots of good resources searching 'copyright' and nothing but bad ones searching 'copywrite'.

Official collections vary enormously in their requirements for selling you a copy; I can't speak for any of the quoted examples, but I can say I've managed to cut deals which meant we were able to use photos (rather than not) with some major collections which are famously unbending.

Jack's point on Getty AVG shots etc is a fair one. It should be borne in mind that organisations like Getty are there to make money from the photos - so they are 'expensive' in our eyes, but for the Sunday supplements etc, they provide a quick efficient service - at a price. It's rare we should need to use them, as many of the interesting shots are obtainable elsewhere.

Regards,

[Edited for spelling. ]

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

http://www.boeing.com/multimedia/index.html
http://boeingmedia.com/license.cfm
http://www.boeingimages.com/boeingCSharpSite/
http://pictopia.com/perl/gal?provider_id=237 (note that prints are sold by an outside source)

http://boeingmedia.com/imageView.cfm?id=166&ResID=5
http://boeingmedia.com/imageView.cfm?id=167&ResID=5
http://boeingmedia.com/imageView.cfm?id=172&ResID=5
http://boeingmedia.com/imageView.cfm?id=4017&ResID=5
http://boeingmedia.com/imageView.cfm?id=511&ResID=5
http://boeingmedia.com/imageView.cfm?id=518&ResID=5
http://boeingmedia.com/imageView.cfm?id=4012&ResID=5
http://boeingmedia.com/imageView.cfm?id=14968&ResID=5
http://boeingmedia.com/imageView.cfm?id=14958&ResID=5

Thanks for the information. If it wasn't for veterans, families, buffs, etc., I wouldn't be making the effort to work on projects. It doesn't pay much but the countless letters, emails, and phone calls from the above mentioned people saying thanks makes it easier.

Hello,

I would like to save a little time if possible on the following if anybody can help. It usually takes about a month or so for the National Archives to check.

I'm looking for production line images of the F3D-1, F7F, F4U-5NL, F-82G/H, and F-94B. Also, experimental and wind tunnel testing of the F3D, F-82, and F-94.

Thanks,

Alan