Toronto Photography Meetup Group

I found some photos I had sold have been scanned and reproduced on vinyl wraps on the side of a few trailers at the snowcross this weekend. I pointed out to these people that they did not have the right do this as they did not seek my permission, and in one case the people involved had already tried to scan the prints for enlargements, but luckily no photo lab would do this for them, as I have stamped the back of all prints. Its not like they can't afford to pay, as they probably have well over $100,000 in the truck and trailer.

In another case the person insists he can do whatever he wants with the photos as he believes he owns them, when all he bought was a 4x6 print. I told him that both he and the party that made up the vinyl graphics are at fault.

So who do I chase down in this case, and what damages do you think I should seek?

Thanks for the help.

Set a reasonable cost ask them to pay it. Show them the copyright law under which you sold them the print and also remind them that they have already paid the for the vinyl so it would be less expensive then having them have to redo. If they don't then your have to proceed to more legal measures.

Might be time to get a lawyer involved.

Anytime a lawyer is involved they are the only ones that win.

In one case they are pleading ignorance, but I have had a judge tell me "Ignorance of the law is no excuse"

Isn't the parties that did the actual printing as much or more at fault in this case, since they should know they cannot reproduce work without the consent of the author of the work in question?

The company that did the printing may have been acting in a good faith belief that the person who provided the shots had license for their use. I'm not very well versed in copyright law though, so the two may in fact be seen as "jointly and severally liable."

You might be surprised how many people who seem to have the funds available to pay for licensed use, will plead poverty when it comes to actually licensing. I was recently contacted by a racer who mentioned that he also wants to re-wrap his trailer, so you can bet that I'll be watching carefully.

The short strokes of it are that you should at least CONSULT a lawyer who specializes in copyright. You may be able to receive some free advice and, for the cost of a couple of hundred dollars, may be able to obtain a letter that you could send to the offending parties.

That may be true but don't you want legal advice from someone who knows and does it for a living or some anonymous person that plays one on the internet?

I'm just trying to get some ideas from anyone that may have had something similar happen to them.

A year ago someone did contact me for an image to use on the backdoor of their trailer, and we came to an agreement on everything, and they also included my name as a form of advertising in said agreement.

In the one case they can't plead poverty, as the wife is a partner in an accounting firm in Toronto, and as we all know, that is like having a printing press it seems, same as a lawyer or doctor.

Years ago I had taken a shot which I had sent to a friend to use on his weblog and that shot accidently ended up in the inbox of a large company and they used it, thinking they had full rights to. Once I showed them that I was the owner of the shot, they compensated me accordingly and I have ended up doing quite a bit of work for them since.

The biggest problem is I will be seen as a bad guy if I get into legal action, but if I don't stand up for myself, I'll just get walked all over again and again

This is not Canadian based but it has some useful information:

http://lorelle.wordpress.com/2006/04/10 ... r-content/

Ouch! Sorry to hear about your situation. If you sold a photo/postcard to someone that still doesn't give them the rights to use as they seem fit. They bought a photo, not the legal rights to reproduce it. You can ask politely at the start but if they ignore that, then it's time to bring up lawsuit and have a lawyer ready. The sucky part is that hiring a lawyer is going to get costly in a hurry.

This, right here, is the issue. If you allow your copyright to be worthless, then it will continually be considered as such. It isn't being a "bad guy", it's business. That's the bottom line. Anyone who would make use of your images in such a way would balk when someone else made use of their own work, without compensation.

Recently it took me precisely 62 days to have someone's website taken down because the owner didn't abide by my generous Creative Commons licensing terms. There were pictures from 4 different photographers used on that page. Three were credited for their work. I was not. Out of something like 9 images used for navigation on his site, 4 of them were mine. It took an email to the site owner (ignored), a registered letter with evidence of the images used and their origins (ignored), and an email to the site administrator (responded to within 2 hours) to get the site pulled.

The images in question had been cropped and/or rotated to the point that the source was no longer readily recognizable. Fortunately I'm the only guy shooting Olympus at the track and I recognize my own style.

If you ever have hopes of being anything approaching a professional, then you have to protect your work. This is a two edged sword; you can appear to be professional, or end up with a reputation for being unreasonable. Fortunately there are enough people around the track who know me now, so anyone who tried to impugn my reputation would ultimately fail. Approach the situation in a reasonable and measured manner. Offer the offender several means of redress, if possible. Put the ball in THEIR court.

Decide how much the license for the image is worth to you. Send them a polite registered letter advising them that you are happy that they like your image enough to use it on a billboard, but that you are entitled to be compensated for it and make the amount of compensation you want clear. Provide evidence that you own the photograph.

If you don't receive a response, send them another follow up registered letter advising of their failure to respond to the initial one and set out consequences if they don't respond to you by a certain date (ie. you will be forced to escalate the matter and retain a lawyer to pursue damages through a formal court process).

You then need to decide if the value of the license is worth the upfront cost of hiring a lawyer to pursue damages. A lawyer will claim damages as well as costs related to pursing this matter from the defendant, so although it may cost to hire a lawyer, if you are successful in obtaining a judgment against the defendant, your legal fees should be covered (at least a substantial portion of your fees).

I am well known around the snowcross circuit for doing excellent work, yet people don't see it in the same vien as say a custom home builder, and I am sure most are aware of what a print costs to make at say Wal-Mart and figure thats all its worth.

I agree fully with you Rob on keeping an eye out on what you see on the sides of trailers or any promotional material, I actually had a case last year where a magazine contacted racers for images, and people sent in scans of photos they had purchased from me. I pointed this out to the editor of the magazine and he tried to tell me that these people owned those pictures. I told him they only own the piece of paper on which they are printed, as I own the copyright of any image I took. I reminded him to read his own magazine in regards to copyright.

Its becoming a pretty crooked world these days, and it needs to stop.

The big question really is..........what is it worth?

If I said I want $200 per image, they may just remove them from the trailer to get out of paying for this. I will be taking photos at this coming weekends race, as the trailers were parked so close, that I could not have gotten a decent shot of most of them.

$200 for a trailer size print seems like a bargain. If they also use it for promotional work ie brochures, business cards etc, then the cost of the image increases.

I like Ken's advice.

I have to agree with Ken's advice the more I think about it, but I know they will just remove the vinyl and not pay, as they will feel I am ripping them off at $200 per image, as one trailer has two images and another has 3 images.

They will look at me as being overpriced, especially if the other guy that shoots the series gets wind of this, I am sure he will say I am charging too much. He has been known to bad mouth me, and tell people I take snapshots, due to the fact I sell all images as 4x6 proofs, as many people just want a few photos for a scrapbbok, and will often get their favourite made into an enlargement.

Oh, and Carlton, that 400mm rocks and will only get better as I get used to shooting something as erratic as snowcross with that focal length.

If they are making $$'s off the work, a judge will probably allow or assign you a % of their revenues as damages right away + against future revenue.

Best to get legal council. many may even may work pro-bono for this type of work (ie. for free for a cut of the settlement)

What you need to find out, is what a photographer would charge for ALL of the images used on a trailer. This varies from place to place, and sport to sport. For instance such charges are ridiculously low in the world of motorcycle roadracing. More in off-road competition.

Once you know what the total is worth, probably by questioning a couple of the companies that actually do such work or other photographers who have had their work used in that way, you can then calculate what you should charge as a percentage of the pictures used on those trailers in question. This would be completely equitable.

As to that other photographer, he doesn't matter. Your images were good enough that someone was willing to let them stand for his reputation, in 2 metre prints. That means they have value.

Better to have one or a handful of clients that value your work than a thousand clients that don't.

If a photographer (or any type of service provider) doesn't value his/her own work and is prepared to act on principle, how can s/he expect others to do so (be they clients, potential clients, consumers, public).

Act on your principles and not others perception.

Best of luck.

If I was in your shoes, I would charge them twice the cost for lawyer fees. This way they end up paying for the lawyer. That is if it goes that far.

If it doesn't go well for you, 5lbs of sugar in the fuel tank will do wonders for an engine!

An excellent point. Stick to those people who respect what you do. I find that to be true in almost anything. Even in computer wholesale I found that I could waste my time with people who would dicker over the last $0.50 of a price and burn half a day, or I could give those people a final price and move on to properly serve the people who were more equitable and reasonable.

I am actually going to print the following link off

http://showjumping.wordpress.com/2009/0 ... re-of-you/

It is written without any legalese so maybe it will get through peoples heads.

Good link. I've seen a good chunk of that text elsewhere, but couldn't say exactly where.

May I suggest that if you intend to use this text to forward your on commercial goals (ie. present it to existing or potential clients) to please give the copyright holder the courtesy to ask first. If the website owner did in fact craft that article, s/he owns copyright and you ought to ask first before taking it for your own use and make sure you grant the copyright holder attribution for their work.

Printing that and getting permission to do so is step two and only needed if step one fails. If step two fails and they still refuse payment, and believe me, I will be taking photos of these trailers, then obtaining counsel is step three.

So one of the parties happened to be at their lawyers for something else and mentioned this issue to the lawyer who told them that I had to ask their permission to take a photo of them, and since I didn't I am breaking the law, and therefore have no right to sell anyone a photo when I did not ask their permission.

I literally was on the verge of just cancelling my hotel reservation and returning home. I have grown tired of all of this like you would not believe.

How does the rights on this work? If you have a media/photog pass, are you allowed to shoot and sell your photos with full rights compared to the general public being "allowed" to shoot for non commercial purposes?

I know in some venues like the RBC Canadian Open. If you shoot pics on the practice days when the tour allows the public to bring their cameras, you're only allowed to use the images for personal use and not for commercial resale BUT if you have a media/photo pass, you are allowed to resell them. The catch is that to get a media/photo pass, you need to be affiliated or sponsored by a media company ie web or press/magazine etc. so chances are you can't sell the images anyway.

What credentials are you going to shoot your events with Bosscat? Are there any disclaimers for photography usage?

I have a media card from the sanctioning body for the series in question.

75-80% of the seasons program contains my images, and I have never had to pay a fee to the sanctioning body, and nothing has ever been said about one way or the other about me selling to any racer.

If that's the case, shouldn't that exempt you from having to seek permission from every participant at the events? Might be time to ask the sanctioning body what your rights are as a photographer. Good luck bud. I still think you're in the right here.

I know I am in the right here.

I own the image as soon as we click the shutter.

They own the right to their likeness.

If they want to use their likeness from an image I take, they have to compensate me.

It is really no different then sitting down for a portrait is it?

And they are in a public place, and it is not like I am sticking a 800mm lens through the bathroom window as they step out of the shower.

BUT, I cannot sell any image for advertising without the subjects consent.

I am not profiting from their likeness, only being compensated for my time.

Thats the way I understand it.

You are definitely in the right BossCat. I feel for you. Have you seen Law Abiding Citizen?