Not acknowledging copyright

[Drew Phillips]

Anybody want to help this guy out or offer some advice?

http://forums.dieselstation.com/index.php?showtopic=24258

[Todd Corzett]

Sounds to me like everything has been said in the posts... and neither side wants to come to an agreement. The best solution for the photographer would be to get a lawyer and settle it that way. Both sides (and lots of other people in the forum) are throwing around all sorts of legal talk, but a forum isn't the place where law is put into action.

I would guess that the owner of the car was the person who caused the problem here. I doubt that the wheel maker actually went around to photographer's websites to steal images. More than likely the owner of the car/wheels loved the photos and wanted to show them off. They posted them on the company website (which probably has a disclaimer for posting that includes them being able to use the images). The owner of the car should have known that he did not own copyright (the photographer does) so he wouldn't be able to post on their website (if the agreement gave them usage... but who ever reads the agreements anyhow...). I wonder if the company asked the owner to use the images, and if the owner said 'oh heck yeah' even though they didn't have the right to grant usage.

Once the company thought they had permission (even if they didn't) they would pass the images on to websites or magazines and claim they had permission (even if they didn't). You're not really going to get something from the mags, as I'm sure they asked if they had permission and the company said 'yes' (the mag would claim they did all that is required by asking if they had permission, but in court it could be decided that they contributed to the theft, but I doubt that would get too far). The only way to settle something like this is going to be in court (or by the photographer dropping it).

This brings up another thing... Educating your clients about copyright and usage (ie what they can and can't use images for) is a very big thing when shooting photos for personal use. Most of the copyright issues that I read about are brought-up because the client of a personal (or editorial) shoot passes along the images without prior consulting of the photographer. Many clients think that just because they paid for something that they own it... and have no clue about usage. Just because you snap some personal use/editorial images of a car... doesn't mean that the owner can pass it along to their sponsors or after market equipment manufacturers... and they need to know this.

-Todd...

[John Thawley]

Well said, Todd.

My problem in reviewing the thread was all the "bar-room lawyer" talk and suggestions going on. Honestly, if all these people are so smart, how come this happened in the first place.

As much as I feel for the guy, and don't like seeing this happen, I'm a bit unsympathetic of the situation as a whole. This is what happens when amateurs think that a couple of cool photos make them "photographers."

Once again, the real less is... THIS IS A BUSINESS. If you want to be treated as a professional, conduct yourself like one.

I'm in no way excusing the actions of the wheel company.

[Matt Mead]

John could you or someones else please suggest ways that us inexpereinced photographers protect ourselfs from something like that happening??

im guessing setting out rules for usages clearly, when selling pictures to indivduals is one?

[John Thawley]

John could you or someones else please suggest ways that us inexpereinced photographers protect ourselfs from something like that happening??

im guessing setting out rules for usages clearly, when selling pictures to indivduals is one?

That IS the only real way. Like any business, YOU MUST define the work.

1. This is what I'm doing.
2. This is what you get.
3. This is what THAT will cost.

Also, don't define your useage by discussing what they can't do. You simply state, that the image is copyrighted to the photographer and the granted usage rights are X. Lastly, you state that usage is NON-TRANSFERABLE.

But again, in all cases DEFINE THE WORK in advance.

JT

[Todd Corzett]

Like John said... you have to clearly spell out the rights that the client has, and everything else is off-limits. And making sure to get all the details BEFORE shooting the job is also a good idea. You don't want to have any misunderstandings (ie they think they are getting unlimited use for your shooting fee) after you have already done the shoot (with them wanting to 'pass' at that point).

Unfortunately, it seems like the way most people learn is the hard way....

General guidelines... don't give someone a digital image (of any resolution) without specific usage, unless you are OK with them using it for anything. This includes the web. The law says that the image is yours, but that doesn't stop people from doing a screen capture... if they see it, it's theirs. Many times images get snagged from a website, the file names changed, copyrights cropped out, etc... tracking stuff like that down is really hard to do (and most times you won't get much $$$ for it). So, basically, don't put something online unless you are OK with someone stealing it. Translated to clients that means watermark sample images (I've had clients use samples before, even though they were lo-res, rather than going back to me for hi-res images).

When it comes to giving images to a client for private usage, clearly state what that means. I think that this is one time examples of what they can't do is OK. Explain that posting an image online is cool, but that they give it to vendors or sponsors (without FIRST contacting you to get permission).

Lastly, when it comes to submitting things (especially to contests) read the fine print. You may think you have a great image and want to enter it into a contest for a prize... but the entrance rules will often times force you to give full usage rights (most of the time transferable and world-wide) even if you DO NOT win. CostCo has one that keeps being brought-up to me (friends, family, etc.) and I keep having to explain that I'm not going to give-up worldwide unlimited transferable usage rights to my best images for a CHANCE to win a memory card! If they want to use one of my images they will have to pay accordingly.

Once again, the real lesson is... THIS IS A BUSINESS. If you want to be treated as a professional, conduct yourself like one
And another thing along these lines... don't go around posting threads bad-talking someone, especially while you are still getting things sorted out. If you have questions, that is fine, but don't start out by saying 'company (insert name here) stole from me'. Keep things general and ask for advice, but posting email conversations isn't going to help your situation. This is a small world and the client (or a potential future client) may be reading everything (bad) you post online. Keep it professional, especially in public places like the web.

-Todd...

[Alexius M Deters]

I just recently ran into a situation where a marking/promotional company did a screen capture on two of my photos. I contacted the webmaster, who I know, and he immediately took them down, and then CC'd the conversation we had to the owner, just so he knows whats going on...

What I find humorous is that I just asked for them to be taken down, and now I'm the jerk, and this guy thinks I'm an asshole for calling him a "thief" and that he wants none of his drivers or friends to do business with people like me. I just tried clearing up with him that I wasn't blaming so and so, but rather his company in general and that regardless if he did it or his webmaster did it, it was still taken, and used without permission. I never directly called him a thief.

He says he does soooo much work for the sport of auto racing (and i quote him) "AT NO COST" which also makes me laugh. He's trying to put meaning behind what he does at no cost by expecting stuff for free from everyone else too.

Anyways, I find it hilarious how arrogant, and ignorant people can be... Honestly I could careless if he bad mouths me to everyone... What I do doesn't generate any real money, and I use it as a basis to learn. What does bother me though is how much of an asshole he is being about it...

-Alex

[Bill Jurasz]

Also, don't define your useage by discussing what they can't do. You simply state, that the image is copyrighted to the photographer and the granted usage rights are X. Lastly, you state that usage is NON-TRANSFERABLE.
Good advice, since you cannot possibly enumerate all the things someone should NOT be allowed to do with your images, and the list of what they can be allowed to do should be relatively small.

Can I ask, though, if there is an "official" definition of "personal use only" somewhere? Do people often extend that to personal websites, posting to forums, use on AutoTrader.com, etc.? How does "sharing with friends" fit in this?

[Jacob Leveton]

to me, personal use = personal myspace page / forums / emails to friends / non-commercial use...

not to be used on event or corporate fliers / myspace pages / websites, banner ads, etc.