Using images in your blog [split off from BAs Fall]
 

Just curious.. Are bloggers allowed to use photos/images/logos taken from corporate websites like Hyatt, SPG, Delta, etc? I see this a lot on BoardingArea and a majority of bloggers never give credit or reference where the photos are from. Actually, a number of them don't even to relabel the file names of screen shots or images saved from these travel websites.

If they are available in their press kit then yes - that's what they are there for. But photo credit should be given for any photo not taken (and thus owned) by the blog site itself unless it's properly acquired stock photography.

IIRC not using GE but form/etc i did not have to declare ALL food recently

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trust...bout-food.html 186 replies

No need to credit them as long as they are used for the intended journalistic purpose - and blogs are fine for those too. What they can't be used for is travel agencies, sales materials etc...

Nothing wrong with using them on a blog, and it would be pretty silly of a hotel to complain about photos being used. That said, they do tend to complain when the image is manipulated, or if things are added to the photo, which obviously makes sense.

If the image is manipulated or had something added to it, it makes less sense as presumably it would be covered under fair use. That said, they will still complain/threaten if they are edited in a way they don't approve of.

I rather disagree.... blogs are commercial ventures for most, there is no journalistic purpose there.

And TIME magazine is not a commercial venture?

They don't rip of peoples images to use them for free... that's the discussion here. Not who else does the same.

You are right, they charge the hotels for the advertising. The discussion here concerns using these photos to talk about staying at the hotels - basically free advertising for the hotel. No way hotels do not like that type of usage. It is not ripping off people's images - it is using the very hotel-flattering photos from the hotel itself. Ever see a bad photo of an America's Best Value hotel on their own website :)

Unfortunately for you the rest of the commercial world disagrees, and I can assure you a chain like Hyatt doesn't view BoardingArea as a "commercial venture". Just because Flyertalk has a weird fascination with the site and appears to devote an entire forum to bashing the site and its writers, doesn't mean a hotel chain sees it the same way. All blogs have banners and affiliate links. Just visit a large site like Engadget, Huffington Post or TechCrunch. Something has to pay the bills.

Flyertalk also has a weird fascination with United Airlines and appears to devote an entire forum to bashing the airline and its employees.

In fact, last I checked the FT motto was:

FlyerTalk: Bashing Travel Related Products and Services Since 1998!

:D

Using the images published by vendors in the media packs for media-related efforts is exactly what those companies want you to do. Hyatt would much prefer my story about the inanity of launching a new brand which doesn't actually distinguish from the others it already has to at least have a pretty photo which it has perfectly lighted and staged rather than one I snapped on my way into a room I was staying in one random night.

Anyone who labels themselves a travel hacker should not be considered a journalist... especially when they are too lazy to relabel and resize screenshots.

http://oi58.tinypic.com/dxz715.jpg

Right, and I already understand situations like that... but I am asking about taking images from their website and re-posting them on their blog without any time of credit given. It is hard to distinguish which photos were taken by a blogger and which were "borrowed" (except in the case of the points guy who consistently takes the worst travel photos I've ever seen).

There is, at least to my understanding of the law, no requirement to credit a photo taken from a media kit. I can think of plenty of reasons it is a good idea and when I bother to remember I do so, but that's usually low on my list of things I'm worried about when producing content.

ETA: I also could not care less if someone chooses to rename the file or not. The only impact that has is on SEO and even there it is minimal.

When I use content for which I do not hold a copyright, I try very hard to stay within the allowance provided by the fair dealing doctrine.