sad exploitation

This was posted on famed photographer Ian Tilton's Facebook page.

This is the STONE ROSES CONTRACT TO PHOTOGRAPHERS:
(For) the payment by us to you of the sum of £1 
The group (to keep) all Rights in perpetuity throughout the world so as to enable us to exploit the Photographs and the Rights as we (and/or they) deem fit without further reference or payment to you.
You agree to provide us with digital copies of any or all of the Photographs upon request.

Are the Stone Roses taking the mickey? Firstly Ian Tilton's photographs alone helped them along in their music career. 

There isn't a lot I can say about this other than at least Ian got all his earlier shots before this insult of a contract was drawn up the stone roses are wilting, in my opinion age is catching up with them and the earlier shots of bands who are still around from that era tend to be the more sought after images.

English Heritage

Yesterday (sunday 17th) my cousin and I went to a classic car show at Bodsworth Hall which is an English heritage site, the grounds and car show proved to hold a lot of great shots for us both but when we came to have a look around the hall itself we were told "no photography" when we asked why we were told firstly by one member of staff that it was Heritage policy to prevent thefts (yet they sell photographs of the antiquities in their gift shop?) upon wandering around my cousin decided to check how many shots he had left on his memory card as he has only brought a small one with him, as he was doing so an elderly gentleman came up behind us and abruptly told us photography isn't allowed, again we asked why as the house itself is only 150 yrs old and in vast need of repair, we were told again it was to prevent theft and copyright.

Now this is where I jumped in, I am quite savvy when it comes to the subject of copyright in many areas and I explained that the items they were referring to did not come under copyright or that the copyright no longer exists after 75 yrs on items of artwork, this baffled said member of staff who just mumbled about it being policy.

In my eyes the prevention of photographs in Heritage properties is just their way of trying to force people to spend more money on postcards, after purchasing the English Heritage membership as well as fuel costs to get there not to mention refreshments needed during a day out the average person visiting one of their sites has probably already spent around £30 just on that one day out, if like myself and my cousin you enjoy taking photographs of historical places and items purely for our own pleasure and portfolio's why should we have to pay out more to gain a keepsake of the place? especially when we are both more than capable of capturing the angles and shots we want instead of the forced pre-printed postcards in the gift shop.

Apparently if you contact them and book a slot you are allowed to take photographs? what difference does it make if you just arrive with a camera, do they use the time in between to check up on you ? and just what do they think we were going to do with the photographs too? I'm certain that no one would pay for prints of the items and I am also sure that planning a robbery would take a lot more than just a few photographs of an old vase or painting.

I can understand the no flash rule but to deny the public the opportunity to capture their own memories of our own heritage without prior arrangement is to me just pathetic.