Cover front pic: "specifically released for general promotional use"?

DiscussionsAuthor and venue pictures

Rejoignez LibraryThing pour poster.

Cover front pic: "specifically released for general promotional use"?

Ce sujet est actuellement indiqué comme "en sommeil"—le dernier message date de plus de 90 jours. Vous pouvez le réveiller en postant une réponse.

1GirlFromIpanema
Oct 7, 2009, 5:52am

I uploaded a pic of an author that is basically him on the front cover of his first/only book (a diary).

It hasn't shown up yet, and I couldn't find it in Quarantine, so for the time being I'll assume that this is a bug. But it got me thinking: Aesthetic thoughts aside ("not a real author pic!"): This cover should fall under "specifically released for general promotional use" and be free to use like the other cover pics, even if I use it as an author photo --or not?

2mikedraper
Juin 2, 2010, 10:00am

Has this question been answered, I have recently had two author's photos from the cover of their books, flagged.
Based on the usage rules about being released for general public use, a book photo certainly falls into that category.

3timspalding
Juin 2, 2010, 11:02am

That language definitely seems good enough for me.

The bug issue is separate: It's showing up for me, unless it's something else I don't know about. Where aren't you seeing it?

4ElliottK
Juin 2, 2010, 4:44pm

GirlFromIpanema's link doesn't work for me.

It has been my understanding that an author's picture from the back of a jacket should not be used for a LT author image unless permission is received. As TimSpalding said in http://www.librarything.com/talktopic.php?topic=28655

"While most author photos are "publicity" photos, and, in theory, something they want out there, they aren't universally so. And some author photographers, like Marion Etlinger, sell books of their author photos. We've even received a few refusals."

5timspalding
Juin 2, 2010, 5:14pm

No, I disagree. Covers are for publicity, but the terms aren't defined. They might be as narrow as publicity insofar as they're on the book. But if an authoritative source or agent says the image is "specifically released for general promotional use", that's different.

6r.orrison
Juin 2, 2010, 5:32pm

Was there a clear statement from an authoritative source or agent? The OP just says "This cover should fall under ..." without actually providing a source for the quote. My interpretation was that it was the posters assumption, based solely on the fact that it was a book cover.

7timspalding
Juin 2, 2010, 5:39pm

Aaaah. I see. Different.

8ElliottK
Juin 2, 2010, 7:03pm

Many members scan an author's photo from the back of a book jacket and upload to that author's LT page assuming that any/all jacket photos are public domain or have by definition been released for general publicity. This would be an incorrect assumption. LT needs permission, either an email, a link to a site with a general release.

9timspalding
Juin 2, 2010, 8:47pm

Or public domain or copyleft.