Photographic exploitation

I have to admit this kind of makes me mad. I have Flickr website with a few hundred photos on it (http://www.flickr.com/photos/joebecker/) and occasionally I get an email asking for the use of a photo (I've even made one sale through the site to a regional tourist guide). However, a few days ago, I received an email from someone at Mastercard's sdvertising agency. They wanted to use one of my images on Mastercard's website priceless.com, in exchange they would give me "photo credit and would be willing to list your flickr name or full name."

I wrote back and said that I do not give away my work and asked for usage details so I could get them a price quote. Not to suprisingly, I haven't heard back.

I went to the priceless.com website and found the following within the sites Terms of Use:

"Ownership And Use of Submission: By making a Submission, you understand that you are assigning all right, title and interest (including any rights under copyright law) in and to the Submission and any concepts or ideas contained in the Submission to MasterCard...
The assignment you are making to MasterCard includes the right of MasterCard and its designees to reproduce the Submission, ... distribute copies, display, perform, license and apply for copyright registration of the Submission in the name of MasterCard throughout the world in perpetuity in any media that now exists or may exist in the future... By making a Submission, you are waiving and agree not to assert any copyrights or "moral" rights or claim resulting from our alteration of the Submission or any photograph(s), footage, illustrations, statements or other work contained in the Submission. You are also agreeing to appoint MasterCard as your irrevocable attorney-in-fact with respect to the Submission, with the right to execute and deliver any documents, in your name and on your behalf, to ensure that MasterCard can own and protect the rights in the Submission that you are assigning."

The moral: be careful what you agree to and protect your rights!

Here's another moral:

Never, ever keep a balance with MC. It's pretty hard to get by in this world without credit cards, but in light of their practices toward photographers it will feel really good to deprive them of interest by paying our balances in full each and every month.

Better yet, cancel your accounts with them and tell them why you did it. If enough photographers do it and tell them why........

Good advise Hank. But I wonder how many other cards and businesses have the same terms??

This sort of thing ticks me off too. There seems to be a general consensus amoung a lot of business that photos are free and are theirs to do with what they will. Even some of the magazines I've sold images too have tried me on for a photo credit in lieu of payment. My standard response is that I'm happy to provide free images to non-profit societies... do they qualify? Then we start the routine about a stipend or whatever.

In the past I've had a magazine use a cover shot I sold them for part of their advertising campaign later. When I called them up and told them I wanted payment for that use I got a song and dance about how they'd already paid and could now do what they wished essentially. I was not impressed! It was a relatively small publication with limited resources so I walked away from that one.

For a huge company like Mastercard to pull this kind of thing is really annoying. There's certainly no evidence that they can't afford to pay but they clearly have found enough folks who will give them freebees that they just don't want to.

Another similar game that shows up from time to time is with photo contests. I've noticed on several contests that have big name sponsors that if you enter you are assigning the rights for your image(s) to do with what they will for no compensation. Some of them even demand an entry fee from you for the privelege. Hmmm.

As you said Joe, read the fine print!!

Yeah, talking about contests, incredibleindia.org is one of them. Their entry rules suggest:

USE OF ENTRY:

As a condition of accepting a prize, you agree to grant Sponsors and their designees 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 advertisement and promotion in connection with this Contest without further compensation, notification or permission, unless prohibited by law.

Use of Personal Information: Your personal information collected in connection with this Contest will be used in accordance with Werner Publishing Corporation’s Privacy Policy (available at www.outdoorphotographer.com/content/privacy_statement.html) and India Tourism’s Privacy Policy (available at www.incredibleindia.org/newsite/cms_page.asp?pageid=800) including, without limitation, for marketing and promotional purposes.

From: http://www.outdoorphotographer.com/incrediblejourneys/

The crux of the problem is with the introduction of digital cameras and the internet, there are lots of photographers willing to give their images away just to see them published. Many companies are preying upon sites like smugmug, pbase and others looking for free images. Famous line is they will give you credit for the image. Boy!! Isn't that nice of them to give you credit for your picture.

Let me see if I can put this in terms the credit card companies will understand:

For license to use my photos as indicated, MasterCard agrees to allow me to use their credit card interest free for the duration of the photo license. In fair compensation I will promote MasterCard by displaying their logo and contact info in the lower right hand corner of my front window within plain view of the street.

Absolutely no difference than what they are proposing for photographers.

Nailed it, Hank.

I guess the Big Companies just want to get everything for free. Oh well you didn't loose a sale, you gained self respect instead.

Haha, Hank, now that's priceless

It's an outrage for sure. I don't think it's a bad idea to make some reasonable monetary request for the usage and really condem any request for free usage by a multi-billion dollar corp. Frankly, I would expect payment from non-profits as well. Often their CEOs make good money and frankly there are always costs associated with any operation, why leave the photographer out? I've had a similar request (I think, but the request was so fuzzy, I can't be sure), and made a fee request and was told an answer would come when all other image requests were received. Interesting huh?

Paul

I've never tabulated all the offers we turn down each year.... and maybe that's a good thing!

No business can accept every lowball or mooch that comes through the door. Sure, you have to keep track of markets and fall within range, but that DOES NOT mean you have to give anything away for "visibility." Have some confidence in your work and your pricing!

In our experience, a worthwhile prospect may well return for another try if you turn down too low offers the first time around. They will shop around and learn your price reflects that old principal of "you get what you pay for." Folks that don't come back.... Well, you didn't want them anyway.

We're very selective about what we give away and to whom, and we consider the loss of income as an advertizing cost. Our advertizing budget is 5% of gross receipts per year, whether actual outlay for ads or donations to worthy causes in exchange for visibility.

It's actually kinda fun to use a real schmuck's (think MasterCard) "valuable" time exploring their 501(c)3 status and charitable giving practices.

I just had an inspiration. Any time I get requests like your MC scam, I'm going to respond by pointing out that they are asking for a donation, and we only donate to charities and 501(c)3 organizations. There's some value in helping them realize that they are actually asking for a donation, and that might help set the stage for a more reasonable negotiation over price.

Hank,

That's brilliant!!!!!

Paul

Haha, Hank, now that's priceless

For everything else, there's Mastercard!

I think Ronnie is right, with the explosion of digital cameras, a lot of people give away images without a second thought just to see their image used by someone else, and if it is a big company, they like it all the better. Site such as Flickr encourge this. When you set up an account on Flickr, you have to decide whether you will allow your photos to have a Creative Commons license allowing anyone to use your images. I, of course, turned down the Creative Commons license, instead choosing to have all rights reserved. Yet users of Flickr often assume they can use any image they want. This Mastercard business was not the first such "offer" I've received from my Flickr site, just the one that ticked me off the most. Still I think maintaining my Flickr site can be a worthwhile marketing effort. Like I said, I have made one sale because of it and have another one pending.

And now, thanks to Hank, I'll have some better replies next time I get offered such a great deal like that from Mastercard!

Well said Hank

I don't think this is just the result of the explosion of digital cameras though. Back in the late 70s I had a go at freelancing in sailing photography and found pretty much the same thing. When someone got a pretty picture and a friend told them it would look good in a magazine off it would go. The magazines were happy to use these either for free or for about $10. That made it really difficult to stay in business (which I didn't after a couple of years and a very understanding wife ). It was a royal pain to get an assignment to go shoot something from a mag and then see that when the issue came out they used a little of my stuff and some freebees they got from some of the spectators. The biggest difference now is that via the internet anyone can post anything in hopes that someone will want it.

When Jasper Doest was here he told me of a friend who found that a newspaper or magazine (I can't remember which) in Europe had taken one of his images off the web and run it with one of their articles. He won the court case and they had to pay him (rather well too ). I recall that as a thankyou he sent them a note inviting them to let him know the next time they wanted to steal another of his images. Cheeky but appropriate.

Re the non-profits, I'm not talking about the biggies with the execs with 6 figure salaries but rather the little ones like our local bird sanctuary or the wildlife rescue types who spend all their income on food for the animals and on their rent. Anyone who wants a freebee while earning 6 figures I'd be happy to refer to Hank! Hank: would you like to be our collective business agent? For free of course!!!

Think of the fun I could have. I should pay you!

Deal!

Ha! ha-ha, good deal Hank! You GO, boy! You come up with some of the greatest advice for business. You're my champion.

BTW, any bets as to when the Aussie lad will give up his scam? He just wraps a lot of verbiage around his "deal," but it's just the same as in this thread. There will always be those who try to take advantage, and they come in many guises. (Said Little Red Riding Hood and others in folklore, too. )

I'm betting he's trolling on every photo forum he could google up. The sad part is that beneath the bluster, there are elements of his proposal that might have application. Not the conning other people to do his work while he gets paid, but self-generated efforts. Some folks already have articles at their web sites, but not many do a good job of promoting them. Considering all the new entrants to photography and growing aspirations thanks to digital, there's the potential to use the articles as a means of attracting people to your site. How much they would contribute to your sales I don't know, but the emerging photographers I know are looking for online info sources. That's more or less what gave established web sites like this their start, but an individual's online store could just as well feature photos, ebooks, workshops and services as useful photo gear.

Right, then, thanks again, Hank. Good perspective and ideas. I'll keep watching the posts. Seriously, you are very generous in sharing your knowledge. I for one really appreciate it.

Hank I think I've got a business deal that should be a real winner. I

nstead of wasting all this time trying to get free images from photographers why don't we just get them to save energy and paperwork and just send cash? As business manager you will of course get your usual 0%. Seems like a winner to me