COPYRIGHT CASE
All is not well in my Waugh world as at the end of March, 2025.
A company called Copyright Agent is trying to charge me £400 for unlicensed use of an image that their photo agency client (Alamy) holds the publication rights to.
It seems that I used a photo of the hedge at Madresfield, the one that's lined with busts of Roman emperors, in my essay 'MAD FOR MADDERS'. The image had 'Alamy Stock Photo' alongside it, and I should have realised the image was not available to be freely copied. My mistake. I wanted my readers to be able to clearly picture the scene I was painting, a place where Waugh had himself been photographed in the 1930s while cavorting with the Lygon family and where I had photographed myself in 2006. As I say, my mistake.
Alamy is one of the photo agencies that Copyright Agent represent. Last year Alamy itself alerted me to another such case, requesting £400, and I offered them £50 to settle, explaining firstly that the site was non-commercial (I didn't make anything from using the photo and I can't see how I could have cost the photographer anything by using it). I then explained that I survive on a state pension and that £400 represents a significant proportion of my monthly food and shelter. I also wrote to the photographer, apologising for using his image without permission, and he replied, sympathetically, telling me that he had no control over what Alamy chose to pursue. Then I heard back from Alamy, accepting my offer of £50, and the case was closed.
But here we are again. After all, there are thousands of images on my site, in a particular public's interest, and though I have attempted to secure permission to use images every time I thought it necessary (see the note at the end of the 'MAD FOR MADDERS' essay, thanking Lucy Chenevix-Trench, owner of the Madresfield Estate, for permission to use images from the current guidebook), I suspect the odd one will have slipped through. There is now a Google image recognition tool which must make it relatively simple for photo agencies to check for unauthorised use of their images. Indeed, I should make use of the tool myself in order to decrease the possibility of this happening again. And it goes without saying that I will try and make sure I don't slip up in future use of images.
Back to the current case. As soon as I was approached, I removed the image of the hedge at Madresfield and explained to Copyright Agent that the website is not commercial. They said their claim still stood. At that stage I wasn't clear where the image had been sourced, but now I have realised it came from a Country Life article online and that it was my error. The image can be licensed from Alamy for £24. A few days ago I offered Copyright Agent £50. I am sad to report that they have declined to accept it, though they did suggest that they would accept £300.
For me, that is still far too much. The point of this page is to request anyone who feels they have received any value from this Evelyn Waugh website to pledge a small sum (perhaps £10 or £20) towards this case. That is, if it goes to court and if the court decides against me and awards their own costs to Copyright Agent.
I suspect that the court would not be too impressed by a company pursuing such a claim in these circumstances, but I can't say for sure. And by the time that the case got to court, I suspect that Copyright Agent would be claiming more. That may seem like strange behaviour from a company that boasts 'Copyright Agent protects the ecosystem of originality'. For what is my Waugh website if not something that protects and celebrates originality, both Evelyn Waugh's and my own?
There is a culture clash here. Copyright Agent wants to maximise an income stream. Whereas I agree with John Ruskin when he titled one of his books: There is No Wealth but Life. When employees of Copyright Agent end their emails with the line: 'Originality, always', as they do, it makes me think that they want both the money and the moral high ground.
This website represents several years unpaid labour and I would like to think it is valued by some of its readers. Indeed, certain communications over the years suggest that it is so valued. So, dear reader, please get in touch using the email link below if you feel you can pledge a small sum. (No need to pay anything until it comes to the crunch, if it ever does.) Please get in touch also if you have a legal perspective that you think might help me. After all, many of Evelyn Waugh's keenest readers were professional men: I wouldn't be surprised if a poll of lawyers, accountants and doctors put Evelyn close to the top of their list of favourite writers. Oh, and if you want to supply a sentence or two in support of the existence of this website, please send that over to boost my morale.
How it takes the wind out of one's sails, this kind of thing. I must take courage from Evelyn's spirited legal battles with the Beaverbrook Press, some of which he instigated!
What does Evelyn have to say to me? (Sorry I can't show you the Emperor-studded hedge as a whole for obvious reasons.)
"Good luck with your mobfunder, Duncan. If you survive your legal battle, come and join me, Baby and Frisky here at Madders. We will fill the moat with fizz and toast your creative endeavours. Originality, always."
Update at the beginning of July 2025
Not only have things gone quiet on the copyright front (cross fingers), I have taken the opportunity of doubling down on the inclusion of important Waugh photo sessions. In other words, the photos taken by Cecil Beaton and Mark Gerson on particular occasions are now fully realised on this site, as they yield such valuable and irreplaceable insights. Surely, this is in the public interest.
Also, I have at last tackled Evelyn's Combe Florey period. There are now no less than 15 essays up there, where before there were none. At 68, I realised I was at last old enough to see Evelyn through to his sublime, warrior's grave at the prematurely time-torn age of 62.
