A little off-topic - Hanwell Three Bridges

[Robin Summerhill]

As the title says, this post is a little off the topic of Bristol Railways, but it is slightly railway-related.

As you may already know, the GWR used the three bridges at Hanwell on the Southall to Brentford branch for publicity purposes. For those who don't already know, at this point the Brentford branch is at the lowest level, the Grand Union Canal goes over the railway, and a road goes over the canal.

I've been searching the internet but, whilst I can find a number of photographs of the three bridges, I haven't found the GWR publicity shot. I know it exists because I've seen it in a railway magazine at some time in the past.

Does anybody have a copy, or has anybody else found it on the web?

[jules]

Have you seen this one yet Robin?

[Robin Summerhill]

That's the one Jules - thanks.

So the memory played tricks again - it was nothing to do with the GWR but was an advertisement for Lyons Tea

(which also explains why I couldn't find it by Googling GWR Brentford branch and Three Bridges Hanwell)

[jules]

it was nothing to do with the GWR but was an advertisement for Lyons Tea

Well, the tea containers are on GW wagons, so your memory was partly right!

[Robin Summerhill]

A question for Jules (which I would ring or email him about if I had a contact address or number, and I forgot to ask him last Monday )



Where did you get that photograph from, and/or have you any idea who owns the copyright?

[BristleGWR]

I think jules might of got it from here: http://nbtortoise.blogspot.co.uk/2009/1 ... dvert.html

[jules]

Yep I just got it from the net. I think searching for info on the canal rather than GWR that Robin was searching for did the trick for me.

As to copyright, I notice when I go to Bristol Records Office that anything they deem to copy for you they superimpose a Bristol City Council copyright mark on the copies. But, they appear completely happy to let you photograph as much as you like!

I don't agree with some of their copyright policies. Fair enough on city council records, but on things they have been donated?

I have my own bizarre example: in the late 70s I bought the remains of a business that was closing down. I still own and operate it. Somehow, some of our old records fell into the hands of the records Office. Now they claim copyright on documents that rightfully belong to my business, which in some cases I even wrote!

No doubt I could pursue it, but it's just not worth the effort. And at least the records are in a safe place for posterity and stored safely for free!

[Robin Summerhill]

I have my own bizarre example:

Thanks for the information gentlemen.

Talking about bizarre examples of how records offices operate, I have my own (completely off-topic but never mind )

Some years ago I was doing some research into local authority housing provision in Wiltshire and, when looking into the documents held at the Wiltshire County Records Office, anything less than 30 years old needed the agreement of the original owner or their successor for copying. The Housing Association that I worked for at the time was the "owner" of the archive housing records held by the Records Office, and I was in charge (amongst other things) of their housing archives.

Although I was never actually asked, the way "the rules" operated meant that, as the officer responsible within the Housing Association, I would have had to give permission to them to allow me to copy the documents. Jules may well be in a similar position

[madhattie]

When my dad owned a bookshop he helped a little old lady publish her memoirs. She'd kept diaries all her life and built up a fascinating collection of stories and information about things long since passed. The book was a great (local) success, so much so that the publishers wanted more for a second book. Unfortunately, the lady in question had donated the rest of her memoirs to the Record Office and they steadfastly refused to let her have access to them at all!

Quite bizarre.

[jules]

Although I was never actually asked, the way "the rules" operated meant that, as the officer responsible within the Housing Association, I would have had to give permission to them to allow me to copy the documents. Jules may well be in a similar position Mr. Green

Did they insist on ruining your copies by putting "Records Office Copyright" watermarks all over them? Pain in the proverbial when they do that! Takes ages to photoshop them out

Unfortunately, the lady in question had donated the rest of her memoirs to the Record Office and they steadfastly refused to let her have access to them at all!

Did she tell them she was going to publish more? That's probably why they wouldn't let her at her own stuff!

I think the moral of this is: donors beware and only give them what you are 100% sure you are finished with - but that's a difficult call when nobody quite knows the future. A shame really ....

[Robin Summerhill]

Although I was never actually asked, the way "the rules" operated meant that, as the officer responsible within the Housing Association, I would have had to give permission to them to allow me to copy the documents. Jules may well be in a similar position

Did they insist on ruining your copies by putting "Records Office Copyright" watermarks all over them? Pain in the proverbial when they do that! Takes ages to photoshop them out

This is going way off topic but, as its been a bit quiet around here this week, here goes (and at least Pete joined in earlier today, so it must be OK )

The short answer to your question is "No." The longer answer, however, is a bit more complicated.

It sounds to me like different Records Offices may have their own rules, and perhaps I missed the significance of something I said in my earlier post. The Wiltshire Records Office didn't claim ownership to any of the documents - they were merely the custodians, and actual ownership remained with the person/ organisation who deposited them, or their heirs and successors in title. In my case, for example, documents that belonged to Calne Rural District Council until 1934 then became the property of Calne & Chippenham RDC until 1974, when they then became the property of North Wiltshire District Council on local government reorganisation in that year. When North Wilts District Council sold their housing stock to Westlea Housing Association in 1995, the Council's archive material relating to housing transferred with the houses.

(Not that they wanted them, mind you - I was in a meeting in 1995 where the Council solicitor suggested they could now all go in the bin because the land conveyed was now registered land - I took the view "Over my dead body," but that's really really really off topic!)

Anyway, the point is that the County Records Office never claimed ownership of them in the first place - perhaps Bristol Records Office does? If they do, then presumably they have some sort of document that you sign relinquishing all rights to the documents you are handing over?

If they don't have such a document which effectively gives ownership to them, then I think their current position wouldn't stand up before a court if it was challenged and, if you were in the situation that Pete described of a little old lady and her memoirs, you could theoretically bring a claim for damages (ie loss of potential earnings from the book). The threat of a Small Claims Court appearance over the matter may well make them sit up and re-examine their stance

If they do have such a document then, of course, if you have signed it you have agreed to their terms. It is interesting to speculate about what would happen if you said "No - you can have them on permanent loan but if I want them back to refer to, or to extract information, at any time, then I want you to release them to me" Would they refuse to take them?

* * *

PS - Just a further thought about this, so added an hour or so after the original post

99.999% of people that walk into a Records Office are not the owners of the material held there. They are simply visitors wanting to look something up. This 99.999% are the people the staff are used to dealing with; they are not used to dealing with the other 0.0001%.

It may well be that the problems quoted by Jules and Pete were caused by staff using the usual "stock replies" that they give to the vast majority of people asking for information.

If you are the actual owner of the documents concerned, a refusal to take "No" for an answer from a less senior staff member, and asking to see the Principal Archivist to explain your position to them, might well be more productive.