Copyright ignored, Couple USED our Image

[jon jacobson]

<i>In my opinion when <b>you</b> photograph a wedding <b>you</b> are contracted, hired, whatever, to do a job and produce a finished product. When <b>you</b> are done <b>you</b> should provide the finished product to the client and be done with it.</i>

<p>

Raymond, you can have that opinion and that's okay, but my license agreement and the laws behind the license agreement say otherwise for me.

<p>

It is not my opinion that I <i>should provide the finished product to the client and be done with it</i>. If you chose to give up the rights to your articles, or the rights to your photos, or any other intellectual property, then that is your choice.

<p>

Many artists have no problem giving up their rights to royalties and such. That's their choice. Imagine Jeff Goldblum negotiating his contract with the producers of ID4 and Jurassic Park, "oh, no, that's okay, I don't want any royalties from these movies."

<p>

It's ironic that you use the word "image" in describing a photograph. There's another type of image. I have an <i>image</i> to protect, and that is protected by not allowing photographs (i.e., my intellectual property) to be reproduced at Walgreen's one hour photo.

<p>

If your article Raymond, is co-owned by a publisher, what happens if that article is sold by that publisher to another publisher? But this other publisher is putting your article in a rag that is not only offensive to you, but would potentially ruin your reputation? Now you are getting less work because of a tainted reputation. Is that acceptable in your eyes?

<p>

Under your scenario: Says a future bride to my recent customer whose prints are processed at Walgreen's in an album purchased two isles over, "ew, those picture are all green. I'm not hiring them."

[john_h.1]

"I have an image to protect, and that is protected by not allowing photographs (i.e., my intellectual property) to be reproduced at Walgreen's one hour photo."

 

It happens nevertheless.

[josh_cates]

I'm not a photographer. I ordered some prints at Walgreen's and got a call today, from someone telling me they couldn't print a couple of the photos taken by my photographer because they are copyrighted. I decided to become more educated about photography copyrights, and happened upon this thread.

 

I have to say, I'm surprised at some of the responses. There's a lot of condescendence in saying things like "people actually think they can reproduce them legally". And a lack of business acumen in saying things like "increase your prices to compensate for the lost income of people producing their own prints".

 

Most people believe that copyrights protect the owner's right to make a profit off the copyrighted item. Some believe that they are paying you to take the photo, and once you've handed it over, the photo belongs to them. If my photographer were to come to me, and even very nicely say, "I noticed you copied one of my shots ... that's a violation of the copyright", I would never use her again. She does great work, and I'm more than willing to pay her to do what I cannot. But if she starts telling me that I have to pay her not only for what she can do that I can't, but also for what I can do just as easily myself, I'm going to walk. I doubt any of you that are so indignant in your posts would be very happy if you took your car to get the brakes fixed, you had to sign a contract stating that the next time you need an oil change, you agree to bring it back to the same shop.

 

And as far as raising prices to compensate, well, if you want to take the USPS route and say "hey, nobody is sending letters anymore because email is cheaper, and we're losing money on postage income, so let's raise prices", then go for it. Drive your customers even more to decide it's more cost-effective to print their own copies. Convince them that the guy down the street who charges less because s/he's not so near-sighted about economics is a better choice to take their photos. I used to print my own photos because it cost me about $0.16 after ink, paper, etc, per print, and the best store prices at the time were $0.21 per print. My cost is now only about $0.14, but online sites and stores now offer sometimes lower than that, but at most, right about the same price, so I use those services now. If the industry had decided to increase prices to boost per-print revenue, I'd still be doing them myself. There are two ways to make money in business ... high-volume, low per-unit profit, or low-volume, high per-unit profit. Only businesses with very distinctive products or services with clear advantages over the alternatives survive using the latter. Whether you think your photos are so much better than anyone else's in your area that the perception is it's a different product, or you realize that a photo is very similar to the same photo taken by someone else, you should set your prices accordingly. Knee-jerk reactions to market changes are what cause businesses to fail.

 

Think like a customer for a minute. Think about it and realize that you're worried about a customer being happy with your work, reproducing it in such a way that it's not reducing the marketability of your photos, and if anything, it's increasing your earning potential as a photographer by getting your work in front of more eyes. Should you encourage the customer to print their own copies? No, of course not. But I also think it's an emotional reaction (as opposed to a business decision) to ever worry about whether or not they will do so, rather than what it should be.

[jefferson_todd_pals]

<p>Stephen I don't think it would be a smart idea to go after your client on this. It might

be a better option to respond in a way that will excite your client. You want them to

promote you to their friends. But if you attack them you won't be getting any good

referrals.</p>

<p>It's said that if a client has a great experience with you they will tell 8-10 others about

their experience. But if they had a bad experience with you they will tell 10-15 people

about their bad experience.</p>

<p>You want to turn your clients into your best salespeople. I would suggest reading the

book <a href="http://www.creatingcustomerevangelists.com/">"Creating Customer

Evangelists: How Loyal Customers Become a Volunteer Sales Force" by Ben

McConnell and Jackie Huba</a>.<br />

It might change your thinking on how you interact with your clients.</p>

<p>Now, if this were a corporate client that had done the same, then I would have

definitely taken legal action against them. But a lot of that is because 1)They're not

promoting me by using my image 2) They are making money by using my image

illegally.<br />

But in this situation your client is actually helping to promote you by sharing their image

with all of their friends. </p>

<p>Take advantage of it and help them promote you. It might be a better option to let

them know how nice it was that they included a picture for every guest. And then offer to

send them a CD of web sized images that they can use to be able to share the photos

online.</p>

<p>Just my thoughts. </p>