The latest email publicity shot from the National Trust Picture Library shows that the charity – as with charity book and clothing shops on the High Street – has no qualms about targeting the primary markets for non-charity, commercial businesses. We can’t complain about this any more than we can complain about Oxfam or the British Heart Foundation, but there are some subtle differences I will discuss without prejudice after showing a screen snap of the promo.

The three pictures shown may well all be on National Trust property (the beaches, unusually for any country, can fall into that category). But they are clearly not aimed at illustrating only National Trust related issues – the farmer and pig being sent out to the media (which includes my company) during the heat of the swine flu scare. Not, I think, an accident – and it’s a great shot, though uncredited to any photographer in this email shot. My use of this screen shot, for the Trust’s information, is legal under the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988. I am not reproducing the images per se or the design per se, but showing an image of something they have published; like a rag-out used in a newspaper, this is legitimate for the purposes of review.

I would question their policy in not crediting the photographers in such a mailshot, and just stating © of the library itself. That implies outright ownership of the images, transfer of copyright.

Here is the URL for the web version: http://www.b2bmailer.co.uk/view_email.asp?a=49443&b=612

I have been trying to work out why the Trust’s picture library effectively selling material which is not ultimately highly specific to the Trust bothers me slightly. There’s nothing to stop the NT Picture Library taking on any subject matter. Somehow this fits uncomfortably with a strictly edited roster of approved (or contracted) photographers being the only ones represented by the Trust library, and in turn no other photographers or libraries being able to market images taken on Trust property. That could well include both the beach scenes.

It’s a rather like a charity obtaining the right to exclusivity in handling secondhand clothing, so that no other ratepaying store in town can offer elegant used apparel (or compete)… and then setting out their stall with a range of brand new stuff just like Next or River Island, backed by advertising. And doing this from the rates, rents and tax benefit position that a charity shop can secure.

- David Kilpatrick