The eyes of a Wolf always see straight into your soul ...

...You can't hide the truth from them


Please visit the main site - www.wolf-photography.com


Monday, 27 May 2013

My thoughts after the event in Woolwich in May 2013 ...

I would like to start by offering my condolences to the family and friends of Drummer Lee Rigby.  Murder is unlawful ... irrespective of whichever religion one follows;  that he had to die in such a way brought me sadness because it was unnecessary ... and because the act robbed a woman of her life mate and a son of his father.

I have no conflicting thoughts about this incident.  I do have an awareness that's particular to my ethnicity and to my work history.  I'd like to share some insights with you if I may.

I served in the Royal Air Force from 1981 - 1985.  My roots stem from India - that's where my parents were born.  We're estranged because of one main reason ... religion.  They're Muslims and I'm not.  I'm sure you can imagine the complications for yourselves ... but just in case you can't, please allow me to shine a little light on some of the issues concerned.

Life was very different in England in the 1960s.  Racism was rife in certain parts of the land ... much like it is now but we didn't have legislation such as the Race Relations Amendment Act.  It's true to say that the Act hasn't addressed racism in the UK, it's just driven it underground ... but at least we now have a baseline for acceptable behaviour in public places on the grounds of race.  It's early days for these changes and prosecutions using such legislation may be few ... but give it time and see how things develop.

There are many people whose parents were immigrants that settled in the UK at the request of the British government.  Let's be clear about this:  The UK's labour force was decimated as a result of World War 2 and immigrants were invited into the UK to work and to help build up the country and its economy.  You can find references to this in many places.  Google the issue.  Many of the jobs given to immigrants were of a menial nature ... jobs that the indigenous natives thought were below them.

My parents were such immigrants.  They worked very hard and my dad set up his own business and has done very well for himself.  That is his life and it's not something that I am a part of ... by my choice.

There are many of us that were born in the UK to immigrant parents; British citizens by right of birth.

Walking between cultures
It may surprise you to know that life for children born to 'traditional' Asian parents can be extremely difficult.  At home we were only allowed to speak Urdu.  So I guess that means that English is my second language!  It wasn't until I started going to my first school, a Primary school in Bletchley, that I learnt how to speak English.  I seem to have mastered it sufficiently enough to allow me to have a life in the UK.

After my parents divorced (something that they never would have done if they'd been living in Pakistan at the time), we ended up living with our mother; a woman with deep rooted issues to do with her removal from her society and roots.

  • If we spoke English in our home, we were told off and sometimes beaten.
  • We weren't allowed to have 'white' friends come into our home.
  • We weren't allowed to play with our 'white' friends out of school.

I used to see one of my 'white' friends for second breakfast most mornings.  He lived with his father just around the corner from us.  I'd play with other 'white' friends in secret ... because if I was discovered, the punishment would be a beating, sometimes with a slipper, sometimes a rolling pin ... and not a thin one at that.

Many of us that were born in the UK had to live such secret lives because we didn't know what racism was ... and because we wanted to be with our friends, who, in our eyes didn't have a colour ... they were just other kids that we liked and played with.

We were exposed to a minimum of two cultures, dependent on who else we mixed with.  Break that down:

  • A minimum of two religions
  • At least two languages
  • Music from completely different perspectives
  • Diverse food
  • Very different rules in cultures
  • Racism from 'whites'
  • Racism from our own people
Can you imagine what that's like for a child?  Constantly being battered by contradiction?  Great grub and music though! We had to make our own way in a Society that was ignorant of our hurdles.

Racism in the UK
A child doesn't know what racism is ... it has a purer way of looking at the world ... an innocence.  You could put a group of babies or young children from different races together in one room and they would interact happily, for the most part  ... but there would be no racism.

Racism is created and generated by adults.  If you're an adult that generates racism toward any race ... shame on you;  you're responsible for acts such as the murder of the soldier at Woolwich.  This means all of you that generate racism, irrespective of your race, ethnicity or religion.  You are all part of the events that led to his death and are just as responsible as the men in custody for the crime ... because you decided to take part in a cycle of hatred that contributed to this and many other saddening similar events throughout the UK.  Please read this news clip:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/02/birmingham-murder-racially-motivated-police.

When are you going to realise that a pendulum moves in two directions; that every action has an equal and opposite reaction; and that sometimes, the implications of that reaction are so far reaching that it can cause a loss of life.

Tolerance, understanding and mutual respect
We have laws in this country that protect people in various ways ... not just against criminals.  Those of us involved in issues of 'Equality' fought for those rights, fought hard for the changes in legislation and made a difference to the lives of everybody in the UK, whether you have had to use that form of legislation to address the problem is irrelevant ... the protection exists for all as a safeguard and helps to modify the practises and behaviours of those that would otherwise abuse you to some degree in the work place, your place of worship, your place of learning ... or even where you live.

This means we have invested our hard work, our energy and our hopes in the UK and it's legal framework ... and while not Utopia, it's a damn sight better than the Human Rights track record of some other countries.  If it wasn't, we couldn't get so many asylum seekers.

Acts like the murder of Lee Rigby are brutally divisive.  By their very nature, they rip communities apart because there will always be an undercurrent of racism in our societies, because there will always be hate harbouring bitter souls that can't let go of senseless issues.  Such undercurrents are like kindling waiting for a spark ... and all it takes is an act like a senseless, cowardly murder to ignite a situation that could ripple through the whole of the UK - something that we must all guard against.

Christians Vs Muslims
This little fight has been going on since the crusades.  We're a little way further on now ... unless I'm working from a different calendar?  Let it go.

I have experience of both of these religions and both can be gentle, supportive and enabling in terms of human growth and sustenance in times of trouble.

Equally, both have been used to commit atrocities that cannot be pardoned (eg the decimation of various tribes and their culture around the world).

Christians and Muslims are both going to have to come to terms with a few things:

  • Yours isn't the only way
  • You should refrain from telling people that they're going to hell
  • You need to be aware that both Muslims and Christians (and people from many other religions) have fought in battles for the UK, defended it's borders and served in their communities - risking their lives for you ALL ... irrespective of your race, religion, ethnicity or any other difference.
  • Even if you disagree with the doctrine of another's faith, you must be tolerant of it and must never use your religion as an excuse to create civil unrest.
  • You need to get over the fact that there are many people that don't want anything to do with religion - you just worry about saving your own soul

Speaking as a British Asian
The UK is my home because I was born here.  Please would all Muslims and Christians (and any other group) that want to cause unrest and try to divide our communities board the space-shuttle bound for YourAnus on platform 1.

I would like to finish by adding my respect to all of you that have responded with reasoned comments to the murder of one of our soldiers.  Particulary:
Paul Kelly who 'tweeted':  Two nutters with knives don't represent two billion Muslims, and one EDL crowd without brains does not represent seventy million Britons.
... and a Imam whose name I don't know, who sent this message on behalf of Muslims in his community:

I would like you to remember that Britons come in many different shades of skin nowadays;  they speak different languages - in addition to English; and are very diverse in matters of Relgion and Spirituality.

Villayat 'Wolf' Sunkmanitu

Saturday, 4 May 2013

Copyright protection eroded to assist businesses ...

There are many people that don't know about the recent changes that affect Copyright legislation that have been forced upon the 'Creative Community' (graphic designers, musicians, photographers, painters, songwriters and so on).

In the run up to the government's review of the UK and European copyright legislation I, and many others, contacted other creatives, collectives and various art's funding bodies ... only to find apathy towards these events ... and in some cases a definite leaning towards the government's stance on copyright erosion rather than towards its duty to its membership by protecting those rights.

These people and organisations were warned that unless you do something to state your case, the implications of these changes would be dire to the whole of the creative community - not just photographers.

It is now legal to use media deemed 'Orphan Works'.

The changes mean that photographs or other creative works can be used without the owners' explicit permission as long as a 'diligent search' has taken place and the owner hasn't been identified.

The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, is the current UK copyright law. It gives the creators of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works the right to control the ways in which their material may be used. The rights cover: Broadcast and public performance, copying, adapting, issuing, renting and lending copies to the public. In many cases, the creator will also have the right to be identified as the author and to object to distortions of his work.

A full copy of the act, with amendments can be found at www.jenkins-ip.com.  The new legislation applying to Orphan Works will take away the protection afforded by the The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

Orphan works are pieces of creativity - photographs, paintings, words, songs, music - anything that has been created but whose creator cannot be identified.  Previously Orphan Works were given the same level of protection through the Copyright Act.

Why did the Government want legislative changes introduced to 'Orphan works'?  Simply through pressure applied by businesses.  As the legislation stood before the changes, no one was allowed to use any creative content without the permission of the creator.  The Internet has generated a huge amount of creative content that is not properly tagged with regards to ownership.  This is further complicated by social media organisations such as Facebook and Twitter, amongst others, that state that by uploading any creative content to their website, by default, you grant them a licence to do anything that they want with your images.  The first thing they do is strip any metadata from anything that you post as an image or video.  This creates a bank of 'Orphan works' that are now ready to be exploited by the business world.

The image below shows a photograph that has the metadata in tact.  These are the details that are stripped by companies such as Facebook and the title of the image is replaced by a computer generated tag.  The only thing that will stay in place is the 'watermark' with the creator's name ... unfortunately, the majority of photographers submiting images to social media networks don't place any watermarks on their images denoting their copyright.  All of those images can now be used for free if the owner cannot be identified.

Another way that Orphan Works are created is by people submitting items to their own websites as creatives without appropriate tagging - eg the metadata on their images isn't filled in and the owner/creator of the image can't be identified;  these images then appear on search engines such as Google.  Google will state that the image may be covered by copyright ... but certain businesses won't bother trying to find the creator.

Why are certain creatives up in arms over the changes?  It's affecting people's livelihoods.  Photographers, writers, musicians, songwriters will be the main people affected if their content is on the internet and unidentifiable.  Normally, these creatives would be able to charge a licence fee to businesses wishing to use their creative content.  The government has now made it legal for Orphan Works to be used for free by businesses if the creator of the content cannot be identified, while not legislating against companies that strip metadata thus creating more Orphan Works.

The Government's agenda is clear, it's greasing the wheels of commerce ... which will doubtless benefit from kickbacks somewhere along the line ... but the world of professional photography has taken another serious hit.  These changes will take food off the table for many creatives, not just photographers.  Why would businesses pay for creative content if they can find free items that suit their needs on the internet?

Here are some examples of terms and conditions used by some websites to use your creative content:

National Geographic

You retain all of your ownership rights in material you upload, comments you post, or other content you provide to the Site (“User Content”). By uploading User Content, however, you grant National Geographic (which includes its subsidiaries, affiliates, joint venturers, and licensees) the following rights: a royalty-free, worldwide, perpetual license to display, distribute, reproduce, and create derivatives of the User Content, in whole or in part, without further review or participation from you, in any medium now existing or subsequently developed, in editorial, commercial, promotional, and trade uses in connection with NG Products. National Geographic may license or sublicense, in whole or in part, to third parties rights in User Content as appropriate to distribute, market, or promote such NG Products. To enable National Geographic to use the User Content in NG Products, NG may request you to provide the User Content in other formats, and if technically possible, you agree to provide the User Content in such other formats so long as National Geographic pays you the reasonable costs of providing the User Content in such other formats. A NG Product is defined as "a product of National Geographic, a subsidiary, affiliate, joint venturer, or licensee of National Geographic, in any language, over which National Geographic has Editorial Control.” For the purposes of this Agreement, "Editorial Control" means the right to review, consult regarding, formulate standards for, or to exercise a veto over the appearance, text, use, or promotion of the NG Product. You also agree that National Geographic may make User Content available to users of the Site who may display and redistribute it in the same way that National Geographic makes all other Content available.


If you submit an image, you do so in accordance with the BBC's Terms and Conditions.
Terms and conditions
In contributing to BBC Weather you agree to grant us a royalty-free, non-exclusive licence to publish and otherwise use the material in any way that we want, and in any media worldwide. This may include the transmission of the material by our overseas partners; these are all reputable foreign news broadcasters who are prohibited from altering the material in any way or making it available to other UK broadcasters or to the print media. (See the Terms and Conditions for the full terms of our rights.)

You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy and application settings. In addition:
For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.


Your Rights
You retain your rights to any Content you submit, post or display on or through the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed).

This is just a small example of organisations that want full rights to your creative content.  Remember, you don't have to be a professional to be a creative.  A child of two that creates a drawring with crayons is a creative too ... and that drawring is automatically covered by copyright, as are you family photographs that you post on Facebook and Twitter.

Amateur Photographers do a considerable amount of damage to the issue.  The only difference between and amateur and a professional is that one gets paid, while the other enjoys the activity as a hobby.  In terms of the finished article - I have seen images from amateurs that are far more beautiful than some professionals,  yet many amateurs won't tag their images with metadata or a watermark.  As a result, they're contributing towards the decline of professional photography as an industry.

Where a creator CAN be identified, the governement want to facilitate the licensing of its media through a 'copyright hub'.  The creator will have no say in whether it can be used or how it can be used.  As a creative professional, I am very clear about the fact that I only want my art used by companies and organisations that I am comfortable being involved with (eg I'd be distraught if I found one of my images being used on a website being run by some sort of fascist or racist organisation ... or one that offered holidays hunting wildlife).

Get wise - tag your work carefully and be careful where you upload it.  It's better to upload your images to your own website and post a link to that location from places such as Facebook.  Check out http://www.wolf-photography.com/html/IP-UK/respectIP.html  for tricks and tips and do check the net for images or other contenet against your own name now and then.  You might be surprised as to what you'll find and how your work may be being used without your authority.

Villayat 'Wolf' Sunkmanitu

Osprey - Nature section

Osprey - Nature section
Wolf-Photography.com Stock Image Library