Rights grab - Microsoft Future Pro Photographers Contest

Sure, the grand prize sounds pretty sweet, but read the fine print:

 

?All Entries become the property of Sponsor and Administrators and will not be

returned.

 

By submitting your Entry, you grant Sponsor and Administrators an irrevocable

royalty-free, worldwide right, in all media (now known or later developed) to

use, publish, alter or otherwise exploit your Entry.

 

You hereby forever release the Sponsor and Administrators from any and all

claims you might have in connection with their use and exhibit of your Entry as

set forth above. You also agree to sign any necessary documentation to

effectuate that license and release.

 

If you do not want to grant Sponsor and Administrators the foregoing, please do

not enter the Contest.?

 

 

 

great.... they even use the word "EXPLOIT"

I see nothing wrong here. If you don't like the terms, don't submit.

And the word "exploit" is not necessarily negative or pejorative. One should always exploit one's best work and abilities. I know I always do.

Art is on the money here...<br>

The majority of photographic competitions that I have checked out, specify very similar conditions for submission.<br>If you don't agree with the terms, don't participate.<br>On the other hand, if you should reach the 'finalist' stage, how much could the ensuing publicity be worth to you?

This is often seen in competitions. It's not bad the rights aren't exclusive or transferred. It's then up to the potential contestant whether it's worthwhile or not to participate, i.e. is the contest prestigious enough and the prize grand enough.

Be careful what you give away...

 

Here's a story about Elliot Erwitt

 

 

"...The book includes Mother and Child, shot when his daughter Ellen was 6 days old and the photographer, just out of the Army, was 24. He had been taking pictures since high school?he was born in Paris, lived in Italy and moved at age 11 with his family to Los Angeles?and was already associated with the renowned photo agency Magnum, which entered the picture in a competition. It won a prize, but Erwitt declined the honor because the sponsor wanted to copyright the image and thus receive any future royalties. "That?s probably one of the smartest things I?ve ever done," he says of his refusal. He jokes that the image paid for Ellen?s education several times over.

"I see nothing wrong here."

 

You see nothing wrong with Microsoft essentially taking advantage of students hard pressed for publicity. $20,000 for tens of thousands of pictures is a pretty damn good deal. I won't enter, beacause rights grabs like this disgust me, and I'm not throwing away my rights to my best photographs just because I have a 1:1,000,000 chance of even getting past the selection stage.

No one takes advantage of anyone without their permission.

"how much could the ensuing publicity be worth to you?"

 

 

 

 

 

If the contest holders decide to give you credit beyond the initial release of the "winners."

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's a scam: the outfit wants free images, and by offering a "prize" __ they get their quota filled.

I think that Microsoft has since re-vamped that particular rules clause. They have added, "As a condition of accepting a prize..." Whether that could mean a "Microsoft hat" as well as the $20k, I don't know.

 

 

5. Rights to Use Entries.

 

As a condition of accepting a prize, you agree to grant Microsoft an irrevocable royalty-free worldwide license to reproduce and display the image, credited with your first and last name, in print and on the web for the purposes of only promoting this contest.