A week ago, I received an order for prints from the owner of one of the dogs that placed at the ARC National and with the order, came a note asking if it were possible to send the images to her "so I can share them with friends via email." It just so happens that this owner is also editor of another Rottweiler Breed magazine.

So, I sent out the prints and did some research to find her email addy and wrote her to tell her that I was going to send her the web-quality files for free as a professional courtesy. Her reply was that she had scanned the prints and would be sure to give me credit in her ad!?

So, here's an editor of a professional magazine telling a photographer that she's scanned the photos and is going to produce an ad without getting permission from that photographer to use it for that purpose (forget the price of a high-rez file). I'm curious: what would you do in this instance?

Jim

Jim, I have found dog people to really have no concept of copyright. Seriously. I have had intense conversations about it with a very smart person and they argued vehemently that they owned the right to scan and use that photo however they wanted. I asked if she noticed the stickers on the back, or the notice on the bill or all the DO NOT COPIES all over it.

She said I wasn't a lawyer and I couldn't know. I pointed her to copyright.gov and told her to find the answer for herself.

There was a breed magazine publisher that I don't think ever thought twice about using scanned photos.

I don't know what I would do. Send them a bill for the extra usage? Nothing? Talk with them since they do own a magazine? I don't know. I don't think it will be pleasant though

Register the copyright. It makes all the difference in the world.

What amazes me Jim is not only the ignorance of many of the buying and non buying public, but my surprise there are so many of them. Wish there were a way to ease this problem but it just does not seem to get better. The music industry has had this problem for a lot longer than we have, and they have not solved it. What are our chances?

I would probably make my displeasure known and then have to let it go. We have to play nice of ir may come back to bite us, but no sense being a door mat either. Quite a fine line to walk. Let us know what you do.

Lovely, just lovely.

I can see your everyday pet owner being ignorant of such things, but a magazine editor? Nope, don't think so.

Jim,
that's my issue as well. I know that most people think they own the prints they get and therefore think it's just hunky dory to scan them. But the editor of a magazine has to know that it's not legal.

When folks send us files from win photos, we ask if they purchased that file from the photographer and have his/her release. If they send us prints to scan, we call the photographer and ask for a release. In most cases, the photographer is happy to simply know it's being published and to grant a written (email) release. Which is the irony of this case: had she mentioned that she was going to use the images in advertising, I would have advised her to purchase the hi-rez file and make her own prints. In the long run, she'd have paid less.

Preston, more "make-busy" work for me isn't going to change people's behavior nor make it any easier to get compensated for it. Sure, registering copyright material is probably the right answer but what good does it do? It means that I could win a suit if I chose to pursue it. That's a lot of time, energy and $$$ for a $65 violation. The fact is, none of us have the time to chase these cases especially when you consider how many of them we'd have to chase.

Julie, you're right. Regardless of how many times you argue correctly that it's a copyright violation, most people won't believe you. This is clearly a no-win situation and it's going to repeat itself over and over as long as we continue to send out prints.

PeggySue, I think the right answer is to explain that she could have saved money if she had told me the truth about usage when she first contacted me. I'll also have to lecture her about her responsibility as a publisher. And I'll have to do it all in a way that is friendly and non-lecturing (which for me is very difficult ). I'm going to have to assume ignorance rather than intent. My objective is not to alienate but to educate. What good will it do? Probably none. As Julie says, everyone does it so it must be OK.

Jim

Jim, registering the copyright prior to infringment makes it an up to $150,000 deal plus your attorney costs. Registering it afterward makes it a $65 deal.

If more of us would register early and whack the Publishers who are 'willfully' infringing they would start thinking twice about what they are doing.

I have averaged in the four figures in my settlements and haven't been to court yet. When a Publisher is notified and you have done your homework and registered your work prior to publication, it is a BIG deal.

Or you can be the 'good guy' and let them steal from you.

Actually, registration after the fact doesn't limit your damages from what I understand.

Preston,
this person spent $178 for prints so I wouldn't call what she's doing "stealing" nor do I think calling her a thief is the right answer. Trying to explain copyright law is also not going to win me either more money or more points. So, from my perspective, it's a waste of time.

The ones that scan and retouch proofs and then run them in the magazines are the ones I'll go after. I have a natural aversion to feeding the court system as well so if I can leave a lawyer out of it, I'd prefer to do that.

The whole issue of photo copyright is going to change. Much of copyright law doesn't take into account the ease at which people can "steal" images. It used to be that when you sent out prints, you put them in sealed plastic sleeves and if they came back with the sleeve opened, the person owned that print. I can open and reseal those plastic sleeves with an Exacto knife and an iron so that criteria is no longer relevant. If people want to steal, they will. The key -- IMHO -- is to give them what they want so they don't have to.

If you and others want to fight the good fight and turn back those nasty image-takers then God speed and good luck. I'll restrict my efforts to those that are really trying to take something for nothing.

Jim