[Gakuranman]

I appreciate the discussion and the submission. I believe my case to sincere. This is the first time a major publication has used my work without even contacting me, let alone paying me. On my website I clearly state that I am happy for the work to be used under a Creative Commons licence in non-commercial contexts on the internet. This is intended to target mostly bloggers and other people whose intentions are merely to share and like things.

However, the Daily Mail is a major tabloid serving advertisements next to my article, including Google Adsense, to which I have filed a DMCA complaint, and thus profiting from my work. Not only that, but they edited most of my images, removing the watermark and cropping the bottom off, as well as enlarging many images such that the quality becomes poor. As an aspiring photographer, that really hurts.

[radicalbyte]

As far as I see it, you're 100% right.

Or do we want a to live in a society where everyone works for free whilst only large organisations can profit?

The sad part of this story is that the Mail are probably loving the free publicity. They'll earn way more in adsense through doing this than they'd have earned had they followed the rules (and not acted like jerks).

My opinion is that you shouldn't have to settle for the fee. You should get your fee, or the revenue earned from the article. Whichever the lower.