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

TalkAuthor and venue pictures

Join LibraryThing to post.

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

This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.

1GirlFromIpanema
Oct 7, 2009, 5:52 am

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
Jun 2, 2010, 10:00 am

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
Jun 2, 2010, 11:02 am

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
Jun 2, 2010, 4:44 pm

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
Jun 2, 2010, 5:14 pm

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
Jun 2, 2010, 5:32 pm

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
Jun 2, 2010, 5:39 pm

Aaaah. I see. Different.

8ElliottK
Jun 2, 2010, 7:03 pm

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
Jun 2, 2010, 8:47 pm

Or public domain or copyleft.