Another "they are using my photo" thread.

UrbexJunkie

Hi all I could not help but join this conversation as it makes me sick that people are still getting away with this stuff. I had a look at their youtube video and found some interesting tips if you want to flag the video. I hope this helps

http://www.youtube.com/t/copyright_notice

And to see the used image on big advertisment boards I would be charging upwards of €1000 for every one they have used. And the fact that it is still on their website means they could not be pushed to remove it.

And here is the complaint form for you.

http://www.youtube.com/copyright_complaint_form

robinph

Hi guys,

Just want to know what your standard response to a "Can we use your picture in a magazine article, but there is no budget for photography?" type query I should use?

I've a couple of pictures of a former Saw Doctor running in Dublin marathon a few years ago that he's after permission for.

K_user

robinph wrote: »

Hi guys,

Just want to know what your standard response to a "Can we use your picture in a magazine article, but there is no budget for photography?" type query I should use?

I've a couple of pictures of a former Saw Doctor running in Dublin marathon a few years ago that he's after permission for.

Has the magazine paid its writers?

Has the magazine paid its printers?

Will the magazine charge the general public to buy it?

If the answer is "yes" to the above, then you should know the answer

And more importantly, would the former Saw Doctor play a gig for you, if you had no budget for music? I'm guessing no...

Borderfox

If you ring the magazine up and ask what the price is to put in a similar sized ad you will get the price very quickly.

EyeBlinks

robinph wrote: »

"Can we use your picture in a magazine article, but there is no budget for photography?"

If you're circumstances change please feel free to contact me .....

Kenny Logins

Borderfox wrote: »

If you ring the magazine up and ask what the price is to put in a similar sized ad you will get the price very quickly.

robinph

I've no intention of telling them they can have it for free. Iit's more what is the polite way of telling him not to be so cheeky as asking for it for free for a trade magazine that is most definitely not in the charity/ social enterprise area.

Borderfox wrote: »

If you ring the magazine up and ask what the price is to put in a similar sized ad you will get the price very quickly.

€1315 is what the publishers have listed on their site for a 1/4 page ad in this magazine.

Edit:

EyeBlinks wrote: »

If you're circumstances change please feel free to contact me .....

Excellent.

alfalad

I'm curious any update on photo used Mylow? I'm always curious how these things end.

homer simpson

alfalad wrote: »

I'm curious any update on photo used Mylow? I'm always curious how these things end.

I take it you mean me. Still a work in progress, looking like a day in court now

Don't worry as soon as I know I will post up here.

PCPhoto

homer_simpson wrote: »

I take it you mean me. Still a work in progress, looking like a day in court now

Don't worry as soon as I know I will post up here.

if you do get to the Civil Court (Dublin) - drop me a PM and I'll do my best to ensure coverage in the National newspapers and some of the local papers.

alfalad

homer_simpson wrote: »

I take it you mean me. Still a work in progress, looking like a day in court now

Don't worry as soon as I know I will post up here.

Sorry so I did. Sorry to hear it hasn't been sorted out sooner, would have hoped they would realise the error of there ways. Best of luck in court so.

Zillah

God this thread makes me angry.

Tucker.Tim

Not to set a cat amongst the pigeons (ok, ok, I couldn't care less) but the OP brought this situation down on himself by not agreeing to give the rights to begin with.

I find it almost Mel Brooks-esque how protective amateur photographers get over their photographs. If you aren't a professional photographer there's absolutely no reason not to allow your work to be used in this situation. The OP had benefited firstly from events organised by this motor club or affiliated clubs to get the photograph in the first place, and the request came from a clearly genuine, enthusiast source whose aim would be to fund-raise and support the sport you'd photographed and not a commercial/for-profit source. Someone would have to be a very humourless individual not to get a kick out of seeing their work used on a plethora of promotional materials.

The club obviously got caught in a bind and maybe had something printed before they realised they didn't have the rights, but in the vast majority of cases like this the user never bothers to contact the owner to begin with.

They screwed up, didn't tell the full story at first, but the idea of not giving them the rights was hair-brained and a tad ungrateful for someone who professed to 'love' photographing these same rallies.

It's a mess now, with the club hardly covering itself in glory, but this could have been nixed in the bud and neither side would have this first-world headache on their hands.

The OP's situation is not some sort of vanguard against the encroachment of peoples' copyright; he's an amateur rally photographer suing a regional rally club over a photograph. Win or lose, this is of zero consequence.

Kenny Logins

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

Not to set a cat amongst the pigeons (ok, ok, I couldn't care less) but the OP brought this situation down on himself by not agreeing to give the rights to begin with.

I find it almost Mel Brooks-esque how protective amateur photographers get over their photographs. If you aren't a professional photographer there's absolutely no reason not to allow your work to be used in this situation. The OP had benefited firstly from events organised by this motor club or affiliated clubs to get the photograph in the first place, and the request came from a clearly genuine, enthusiast source whose aim would be to fund-raise and support the sport you'd photographed and not a commercial/for-profit source. Someone would have to be a very humourless individual not to get a kick out of seeing their work used on a plethora of promotional materials.

The club obviously got caught in a bind and maybe had something printed before they realised they didn't have the rights, but in the vast majority of cases like this the user never bothers to contact the owner to begin with.

They screwed up, didn't tell the full story at first, but the idea of not giving them the rights was hair-brained and a tad ungrateful for someone who professed to 'love' photographing these same rallies.

It's a mess now, with the club hardly covering itself in glory, but this could have been nixed in the bud and neither side would have this first-world headache on their hands.

The OP's situation is not some sort of vanguard against the encroachment of peoples' copyright; he's an amateur rally photographer suing a regional rally club over a photograph. Win or lose, this is of zero consequence.

Ungrateful?

Velvety

I agree. I think it would have been a decent thing to do, to give over the rights of the photo for free. Its a rally club, not some corporation.

BUT, the rude, dismissive reply from the club warrant further action being taken. Very insulting of them.

Kenny Logins

Velvety wrote: »

I agree. I think it would have been a decent thing to do, to give over the rights of the photo for free. Its a rally club, not some corporation.

BUT, the rude, dismissive reply from the club warrant further action being taken. Very insulting of them.

No, the decent thing to do would have been to respect the photographer's decision and not steal his photo.

homer simpson

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

Not to set a cat amongst the pigeons (ok, ok, I couldn't care less) but the OP brought this situation down on himself by not agreeing to give the rights to begin with.

Indeed it's totally my fault, for not agreeing to have my photo used vastly across various platform's :rolleyes:. I have my reasoning for not allowing them to us e my photo in the first place, mainly because I know they were being cheap and TBH I didn't want to take the business away from a "pro" photographer, as I know many of them in the sport.

I find it almost Mel Brooks-esque how protective amateur photographers get over their photographs. If you aren't a professional photographer there's absolutely no reason not to allow your work to be used in this situation.

What your saying above is every single Amateur photographer (myself included) should give rights to everyone who asks for them because we are not professional, the mind boggles. Take an apprentice or someone training say in something new at work. Should they work for free because they aren't "pro's" at what they are doing, I think not.

Tell you what, my house needs painting outside, will you came and paint it for me, I'll not pay you but I will say you done the work on it though.

The OP had benefited firstly from events organised by this motor club or affiliated clubs to get the photograph in the first place, and the request came from a clearly genuine, enthusiast source whose aim would be to fund-raise and support the sport you'd photographed and not a commercial/for-profit source.

That's just all wrong! I have never benefited from anything this club have done and own them nothing. The photo was taken at the Donegal International Rally (a club which I am a member of BTW). As it happens I have never attended an event run by the club.

Someone would have to be a very humourless individual not to get a kick out of seeing their work used on a plethora of promotional materials.

So how would you describe a thief as then, as that is what this motorclub have done. I am far from a humourless person too anyone who knows me knows that but you can say what ya want, i'm not going to be going to be getting into personal stuff with you as much as your trying to drag me into it though.

The club obviously got caught in a bind and maybe had something printed before they realised they didn't have the rights, but in the vast majority of cases like this the user never bothers to contact the owner to begin with.

They screwed up, didn't tell the full story at first, but the idea of not giving them the rights was hair-brained and a tad ungrateful for someone who professed to 'love' photographing these same rallies.

You are getting borderline abusive here... but can you explain how I am ungrateful? Your saying I should just hand over all my photos to any motorclub to use as they please? I'm going to watch a football game next week maybe I should give all my photos over to the football team to use as they please because I enjoy the game? I'm really struggling to see the logic in your thinking. Also because they asked me and I didn't give my consent to them using my photo makes this much much much worse IMO.

It's a mess now, with the club hardly covering itself in glory, but this could have been nixed in the bud and neither side would have this first-world headache on their hands.

The OP's situation is not some sort of vanguard against the encroachment of peoples' copyright; he's an amateur rally photographer suing a regional rally club over a photograph. Win or lose, this is of zero consequence.

Your 100% right its a mess but if the club had of gone through the correct channels and got their photograph legitimately when I didn't give them permission we wouldn't be in this situation, or discussing it would we?

I can assure you I didn't want to go down this route, far from it I tried numerous times to avoid it by taking to various people within the club, all of those times there attitude was one that stank off f**k you, who do you think you are! Even down the the fact where it was brought up at a club meeting in front of all the attending members (I know as someone I know phoned me after the meeting to tell me as such) and it was pretty much laughed at. That's some attitude and the reason why I am perusing it further.

I'm not doing this for financial gain, in fact in all likelihood the club will never give me a penny, its not about that at all, it's about getting them (and hopefully deter anyone thinking of doing something similar) to realise that what they done was wrong and their reaction was deplorable, and they cannot get away with it


** Unfollows thread **

maddog

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

Not to set a cat amongst the pigeons (ok, ok, I couldn't care less) but the OP brought this situation down on himself by not agreeing to give the rights to begin with.

I find it almost Mel Brooks-esque how protective amateur photographers get over their photographs. If you aren't a professional photographer there's absolutely no reason not to allow your work to be used in this situation. The OP had benefited firstly from events organised by this motor club or affiliated clubs to get the photograph in the first place, and the request came from a clearly genuine, enthusiast source whose aim would be to fund-raise and support the sport you'd photographed and not a commercial/for-profit source. Someone would have to be a very humourless individual not to get a kick out of seeing their work used on a plethora of promotional materials.

The club obviously got caught in a bind and maybe had something printed before they realised they didn't have the rights, but in the vast majority of cases like this the user never bothers to contact the owner to begin with.

They screwed up, didn't tell the full story at first, but the idea of not giving them the rights was hair-brained and a tad ungrateful for someone who professed to 'love' photographing these same rallies.

It's a mess now, with the club hardly covering itself in glory, but this could have been nixed in the bud and neither side would have this first-world headache on their hands.

The OP's situation is not some sort of vanguard against the encroachment of peoples' copyright; he's an amateur rally photographer suing a regional rally club over a photograph. Win or lose, this is of zero consequence.

1. Are you a member of said rally club?
2. Lolz...... What screwed way of seeing this?
3. He said no to the use of his photo and they still ignore him and go ahead and use the image multiple times..... They leave themselves open to any recourse he seeks and in my opinion they deserve it!
4. When he wins his case and he will....do you think the rally club will do that again to another photog? I'm willing to bet that they will make sure they have permission for any image they need to use in the future.

foxy123

At the end of the day the person who took the photograph has the say as to who can and cant use the photograph amateur or not. Simple as. No one has the right to steal the image. The OP is absolutely spot on for taking them to court as would I and any other photographer with self respect. They stole his property, ignored his requests to not use it. Fair play for making a stand. That whole post by Tucker.Tim is incredibly insulting to all of us amateurs......

DeVore

no no....we should be grateful for the photons they send our way!!!

:rolleyes:

alfalad

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

but the OP brought this situation down on himself by not agreeing to give the rights to begin with.

That line is incredible. Such bizarre logic. I look forward to seeing Tim's response to homer.

Tucker.Tim

Some of the abuse above is utterly ridiculous and I can't believe a moderator on the this board not only saw it, but actually added one of the most questionable posts. Calm down, and quickly.

Alot of you seem to have wilfully misread what was said - the OP had no reason to not offer the photograph when asked, it was a genuine, enthusiast source supporting an activity he professed to 'love'. If you're an amateur and hence you'll not be looking to sell those photographs in future, let alone to the motor club in question, it's hard to see the reasoning behind not being generous and letting them get on with their work. If they were a commercial source all bets would be off, but they clearly were not and the OP knew that.

Everything after that first day spiralled and the club have made plenty of wrong moves, but I'm questioning the very fact he was reluctant to offer the photograph to such a source to begin with - it seems over-protective and I can't imagine ever doing the same in that position. Hence I feel it's more than valid to say that the OP, to some degree, brought this tussle down on himself.

CabanSail

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

Some of the abuse above is utterly ridiculous and I can't believe a moderator on the this board not only saw it, but actually added one of the most questionable posts. Calm down, and quickly.

Alot of you seem to have wilfully misread what was said - the OP had no reason to not offer the photograph when asked, it was a genuine, enthusiast source supporting an activity he professed to 'love'. If you're an amateur and hence you'll not be looking to sell those photographs in future, let alone to the motor club in question, it's hard to see the reasoning behind not being generous and letting them get on with their work. If they were a commercial source all bets would be off, but they clearly were not and the OP knew that.

Everything after that first day spiralled and the club have made plenty of wrong moves, but I'm questioning the very fact he was reluctant to offer the photograph to such a source to begin with - it seems over-protective and I can't imagine ever doing the same in that position. Hence I feel it's more than valid to say that the OP, to some degree, brought this tussle down on himself.

I have read all your posts here and fully understand the views you were putting forward. I think the others that have responded seem to have a similar understanding of the issue.

My problem is that the view you are putting seems so ridiculous that it was actually meant to be provocative. The creator of the image has the "right" to refusal, and they do not have to provide reasons either way. That decision should be respected. Personally I can think of many reasons why I may refuse the use of an image, and may not like to state those reasons.


My posts in this forum are generally my own views. It is made quite clear when my posts are for moderation purposes. If you have a problem with how I perform my duties here as a Mod then there is a procedure to follow.

Kenny Logins

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

Some of the abuse above is utterly ridiculous and I can't believe a moderator on the this board not only saw it, but actually added one of the most questionable posts. Calm down, and quickly.

Alot of you seem to have wilfully misread what was said - the OP had no reason to not offer the photograph when asked, it was a genuine, enthusiast source supporting an activity he professed to 'love'. If you're an amateur and hence you'll not be looking to sell those photographs in future, let alone to the motor club in question, it's hard to see the reasoning behind not being generous and letting them get on with their work. If they were a commercial source all bets would be off, but they clearly were not and the OP knew that.

Everything after that first day spiralled and the club have made plenty of wrong moves, but I'm questioning the very fact he was reluctant to offer the photograph to such a source to begin with - it seems over-protective and I can't imagine ever doing the same in that position. Hence I feel it's more than valid to say that the OP, to some degree, brought this tussle down on himself.

I am an amateur photographer (very amateur) and I have had a couple of photos included in a magazine article, and I admit I was chuffed seeing them in print with my name beside them. It's little things like this that make all the expense and countless hours of learning and experimenting worthwhile.

If the situation was that they had already pinched my photos, removed the watermarks and then later cheekily asked for permission to use them on a Facebook profile and any number of other unspecified promotional tools I'd have said no too. ..and not politely either.

I'm sure if the person in the club responsible had himself invested the same amount of time and expense in becoming an amateur photographer he'd appreciate that it's simply not on to use photos without permission, and asking afterwards only exacerbates the issue.

sNarah

Greetings boardsies
Moderator note

As Tony is involved in this thread, I think it would be best for it to be moderated by myself or Borderfox as we have no involvement.

I have deleted some of the replies to Tim.Tucker which were off topic.

The thread will remain open as long as the discussion remains sensible and on topic, also to ensure Homer_Simpson has a place were he can share his troubles.

Keep in mind that amateur photographers have copyright rights. Any other form of abuse or personal attacks will also be dealt with.

If anyone has any (other) issues with this thread, please use the report button or PM myself and the fellow mods in CC. I will not get involved here, but Homer: do keep us posted on how you get on, remember, we are here to support and advice you if needed.

Fair play for following this through, Homer. I'm sure it's a pain in the ass for you, and a courtcase for anyone, regardless of what they believe the outcome may be, must surely be a daunting thing.

I'd certainly be looking for megabucks. At the very least you should be picking out one or two luxury camera items that you'd like to get and making this cover the cost.

The sheer audacity of that rally crowd is amazing. No doubt they never expected you to follow up. Definitely go in asking for more than you expect to get. If they're let off with a slap on the wrist after having abused your photograph so much then it really opens the floodgates for other companies to not pay for images.


They'll hopefully be made an example of, and, as much as I despise that Sean Sherlock, his moaning and whinging about copyright theft recently should bode well for you.

K_user

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

Not to set a cat amongst the pigeons (ok, ok, I couldn't care less) but the OP brought this situation down on himself by not agreeing to give the rights to begin with.

....

The OP's situation is not some sort of vanguard against the encroachment of peoples' copyright; he's an amateur rally photographer suing a regional rally club over a photograph. Win or lose, this is of zero consequence.

Couldn't disagree with you more mate!

By your logic photographers lose the right to their images. The media, promoters, or anyone looking for an image, could take them off any site, change them around and use them as they please. And the "amateur" should consider themselves lucky, after all their work is being used.

I doubly love this statement:

"I find it almost Mel Brooks-esque how protective amateur photographers get over their photographs"

So in your opinion, unless you are getting paid for something, photographers have no rights. That the time, effort, money and dedication that we put into our hobby/craft/art/pass time, is laughable. Its a farce, a joke, that we should feel protective of the effort we put in, just because we do it in our spare time.


To the OP, its your photograph, its your right to question as to how its used. If this crowd are showing such lack of respect, then they deserve to be taken down a peg or two.

Reoil

I think it would be best if we ignore Tucker.Tim's troll-like post and concentrate on the main issue of this thread.

Heebie

I just read this article about a guy who decided to assert his copyright.

Chilling

http://www.freezepage.com/1337899756JULEMRWMMO

Tucker.Tim

Reoil wrote: »

I think it would be best if we ignore Tucker.Tim's troll-like post and concentrate on the main issue of this thread.

It's pretty disgusting that so many of you think it's even approaching appropriate conduct to assume an opinion that doesn't suit your viewpoint is trolling. So close-minded.

CabanSail

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

It's pretty disgusting that so many of you think it's even approaching appropriate conduct to assume an opinion that doesn't suit your viewpoint is trolling. So close-minded.

In this forum there is acceptance of differing opinions where the subject has the scope for them. In this instance you are putting an opinion which contradicts the copyright law. It also implies that Amateur Photographers should not have control over their own work. This is so much nonsense that it seems to be trolling. You have a right to your opinion, but in this case it is clearly wrong.

crazyFeet

i sent them a letter to express my unhappiness caused by this issue, the more they get the worried they will be

PCPhoto

crazyFeet wrote: »

i sent them a letter to express my unhappiness caused by this issue, the more they get the worried they will be

if its going to court then I dont think it'll make a difference if they receive letters telling them they were wrong.

They know it, the photographer knows it and most importantly....the courts will* determine it.


* = statement indicates that the courts will determine what they believe to be the truth on the balance of probabilities.(civil court)

homer simpson

I had totally forgotten about this thread (I'd unfollowed it a long time ago for obvious reasons)until today when tidying up I found a letter relating to it.

It didn't go as far as getting to court but it got as far as the process of applying to the courts.

They (the club) sent me a very short letter admitting they were wrong and they wished to express their sincere apologies, they hoped this would be sufficient to make it "go away" I felt but I wasn't leaving it at that.

My solicitor (in the end I used a friend of a friend who seemed to know his stuff and was newly qualified) then couldn't get a straight answer from the club, seemingly nobody knew who wrote / typed the letter as it wasn't signed by an individual, just from the club. After a while he'd given up and proceeded as if the letter hadn't been sent as the club were acting as if it hadn't.

Again some time had passed, got in contact with my solicitor who told me everything was in motion to bring it before a judge and he would decide, but worryingly he told me it could swing either way :eek: I really wasn't looking forward to it.

Two weeks later my phone rang expecting it to be a call to confirm a date but no it was that they'd wanted to settle this somehow, I was extremely tempted to proceed with the legal route , court, but the words "it could swing either way" were still ringing in my ear!

Long story short they'd explaining (via our solicitors) how they sought advice from someone inside the club since the start and when the court was pending sought proper advice and we told how wrong they really were and they had apologised profusely for it and went on to say how it was down to one person ironically the club PRO (pr officer) who'd "downloaded" my photo and told them to use it, they then at my request promised they would never do anything like it again and would go about thing in the proper manner in future, they also acknowledged that it should never have dragged on as long as it did but that was down to them being advised wrongly on the matter. They also brought it up at a club meeting AFAIK (well they told me they would) and the story told and explained and me apologised to me again.

There was a cheque sent to me too via my solicitor but it covered all my expenses and not much more but that end I wasn't bothered with so long as they showed genuine remorse and seen they'd done wrong and promised it wouldn't happen again.

All in all it should have been dealt with much sooner than it was also I know I'd said I was going to go all the way but TBH I was glad to be done with it and although it was very likely I would win if it went as far as a court there was still a chance that they might win and that I didn't fancy!

Job done IMO! :cool:

.Longshanks.

Well done for sticking with it

Lotsafish

Thanks for letting us know the outcome of it, it was baited breath there for me for a long time!