Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Popular Photography Contest - Rights Grab Warning!  (Read 4332 times)
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5655



WWW
« on: October 11, 2010, 07:49:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Another sad moment: a photographic magazine engaged in a blatant rights grab. Popular Photography magazine has this in its annual readers' contest rules:

"... By entering, you grant to Sponsor a non-exclusive, worldwide, royaltyfree license to edit, publish, promote, republish at any time in the future and otherwise use your submission, along with your name and likeness, in any and all media for any purpose, without further permission, notice or compensation..."

In addition, they charge you $10 per image for this dubious "privilege" to enrich their stock library.

EDIT: Not surprisingly, another photo magazine of the same parent company, American Photo, has exactly the same language in their annual contest. The only difference is they charge $25 per photo.  Sad
« Last Edit: October 15, 2010, 12:01:10 PM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2010, 04:03:32 AM »
ReplyReply

But sadly, there will be no lack of willing rapes.

On the other hand, if they don't care, why would I for them? The entire industry is cut into a million bits because of infighting, poor business sense and a general state of anxiety; why should the amateur be different? At least the money doesn't matter to him, though the damage to the professional section is ever greater through such practice: the setting of precedents.

Rob C
Logged

Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1875


WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2010, 07:45:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Clearly there is both good $$ and opportunity to be made by putting a carrot before the herd.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2010, 11:31:23 AM »
ReplyReply

It's strange with Pop Phot; in the 50s and 60s they were excellent magazines with lots of pro content and their two annuals were wonderful. First saw W. Eugene Smith's work there (Pittsburgh) as well as Bert Stern, Haskins and so many others. I was very much influenced/educated by what I beheld within those covers.

I did see a copy of the mag some years ago and thought it terrible, just as I found the US version of French Photo: all 'mentor' and photo-travel packages. Photography? Totally US oriented. They did a Top 100 photographers thing once when I was still buying the two versions; the US one was as if Europe had never existed. So parochial.

Rob C
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6188



WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2010, 12:03:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Right, Rob. I remember when the mag was good too. But now it's nothing but a catalog of equipment for sale. Their "pro's" attempts at improving "amateur" photographs are so absurd that they're hilarious. I've been a subscriber for a long time but I'm about to let my subscription expire. Too bad US Camera is long gone. That used to be another good one, but had it survived it'd probably be much like Pop Photo. Let's face it, the big thing nowadays is equipment, not photographs. Thank heaven for LuLa.

As far as their "contests" are concerned, they operate strictly on the Barnum principle.
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #5 on: October 12, 2010, 01:13:29 PM »
ReplyReply

... Let's face it, the big thing nowadays is equipment, not photographs. Thank heaven for LuLa.

As far as their "contests" are concerned, they operate strictly on the Barnum principle.
Yes! probably also because of the same effect.

Photography does not sell, equipments yes. Now they democratized the photography to a global scale they all want the part of the cake, except that the photographers are not invited.
Lets take the art galleries, well a print masterpeice photography of a known master is priced like an average painting of a local artist. But a MF equipment costs the same as a peice of land.
 
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5655



WWW
« Reply #6 on: October 15, 2010, 12:00:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Not surprisingly, another photo magazine of the same parent company, American Photo, has exactly the same language in their annual contest. The only difference is they charge $25 per photo.  Sad
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #7 on: October 15, 2010, 01:55:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Not surprisingly, another photo magazine of the same parent company, American Photo, has exactly the same language in their annual contest. The only difference is they charge $25 per photo.  Sad


That Filipacchi ain't no fool!

Rob C
Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 15, 2010, 02:02:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Not surprisingly, another photo magazine of the same parent company, American Photo, has exactly the same language in their annual contest. The only difference is they charge $25 per photo.  Sad

So let me get this straight: they take my money, and in return they take full rights to my photos.

P.T. Barnum was (once again) right about the number of suckers out there. I bet they get a lot of submissions.
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6188



WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2010, 02:06:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Harri, They only take your money and your copyrights if you're dumb enough to send them your photos. But that doesn't deter the same sort of folks who used to respond to Barnum's "EGRESS" sign by exiting the attraction they'd paid for and then find the door locked behind them.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #10 on: October 15, 2010, 02:29:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Ah, the old tricks!

Rob C
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5655



WWW
« Reply #11 on: October 15, 2010, 03:52:05 PM »
ReplyReply

That Filipacchi ain't no fool!

Not any more... last year Filipacchi sold Popular Photography and American Photo magazines to Bonnier Corp.:

http://www.bonniercorp.com/news/bonnier-corp-acquires-five-magazine-brands-from-hachette-filipacchi-media-us-1000072410.html

Looks like the change in contest rules is a consequence of the ownership change. I am rather careful which contests I enter, and I am pretty sure such rights grabbing rules were not in place before. 
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
PhillyPhotographer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 334


« Reply #12 on: October 15, 2010, 04:03:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Seems standard practice today.

"By entering, you grant to Sponsor a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license to edit, publish, promote, republish at any time in the future and otherwise use your submission, along with your name and likeness, in any and all media for any purpose, without further permission, notice or compensation (except where prohibited by law)"
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6188



WWW
« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2010, 04:50:32 PM »
ReplyReply

It's not standard practice for actual photography magazines like LensWork, B&W, Color, etc. Only for equipment magazines.
Logged

PhillyPhotographer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 334


« Reply #14 on: October 15, 2010, 05:04:58 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm still not seeing the problem.

Have there been complaints ?
« Last Edit: October 15, 2010, 05:06:54 PM by PhillyPhotographer » Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5655



WWW
« Reply #15 on: October 15, 2010, 05:46:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm still not seeing the problem.

Have there been complaints ?

I am not sure if you are serious or sarcastic. If serious, you do not see a problem with them exploiting your photo "any time, for any purpose, in any media"?
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5655



WWW
« Reply #16 on: October 15, 2010, 05:50:46 PM »
ReplyReply

... "By entering the Contest, all entrants grant an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide non-exclusive license to Authorized Parties, to reproduce, distribute, display and create derivative works of the entries (along with a name credit) in connection with the Contest and promotion of the Contest,  ..."[/i]

John, there is a crucial and substantial difference between NG terms and Bonnier terms, and it is underlined in red above.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
PhillyPhotographer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 334


« Reply #17 on: October 15, 2010, 05:57:26 PM »
ReplyReply

So they can reprint it their other magazines, later issues of the same magazine or use it to advertise all over the world ? Can they make prints and sell them ? I asked and was told "No". So what it comes down to is they might use your photo later on which might draw more attention to your work all without lifting a finger ? Again, unless I'm missing something I don't see the problem if you know what the rules are before you submit a photo,. It doesn't sound like they're trying to scam anyone. Has anyone complained that they were taken advantaged of ?
Logged

JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #18 on: October 15, 2010, 06:01:48 PM »
ReplyReply

John, there is a crucial and substantial difference between NG terms and Bonnier terms, and it is underlined in red above.

Missed that! Thanks for the proof-read and correction.

My post has been withdrawn Embarrassed

Jack



.
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #19 on: October 15, 2010, 06:38:13 PM »
ReplyReply

So they can reprint it their other magazines, later issues of the same magazine or use it to advertise all over the world ? Can they make prints and sell them ? I asked and was told "No". So what it comes down to is they might use your photo later on which might draw more attention to your work all without lifting a finger ? Again, unless I'm missing something I don't see the problem if you know what the rules are before you submit a photo,. It doesn't sound like they're trying to scam anyone. Has anyone complained that they were taken advantaged of ?

The point that gets me is that they're perpetual, and in any media - not only connected to the competition. Even if the current outfit honors common sense when it comes to photographers' rights, say they get bought up by a stock agency with less scruples: the stock agency can use all submitted photos in any advertising in any media for any purpose.

Of course signing off your rights and giving them $25 for the privilege is your prerogative.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad