PDA

View Full Version : Copyright violation-Selling my pictures without my permission!


Pages : 1 [2]

inthedeck
19th of April 2007 (Thu), 00:11
Dude, as mentioned above...the t-shirt says it all. Copyright symbol or not...it's your image...fair and square. You are the only one with an 'actual' original picture, of this scenario...two, at that (from what it looks like here).

If they cannot produce an 'original' then they have nothing on you, and you win automatically. Scare them with that, and if they don't fess up, or provide you with what 'you' feel is right...then, well, you know where to go from there. Legal fees are a hassle...try arbitration...in front of an independent arbitrator.

Good luck...and after reading your update...I must say...I feel for you!

tcphoto1
19th of April 2007 (Thu), 07:49
It sounds like you've let them steal your work.

jfrancho
19th of April 2007 (Thu), 11:02
It sounds like you've let them steal your work.No, it sounds like he is waiting to get a response, and then act accordingly:

I have spoken at length to my intellectual properties attorney and we have proposed a licensing agreement to the event promoter and the parent organization where I feel everyone will benefit.

I am sure his lawyer has advised him that mum's the word for now.

sfaust
19th of April 2007 (Thu), 15:05
If they cannot produce an 'original' then they have nothing on you, and you win automatically.

If life were only that simple! It just doesn't work that way unfortunately. There is no guarantee he would win. There are lots of nasty little curves that can get the case thrown out on technicalities, registration issues, not counting trying to prove the actual damages, and so on. Then there is the possibility that his legal costs will be far more than he will be able to collect since he didn't register the images prior to the infringement and looses all the real teeth congress put in the law for infringement like his attorney fees, statutory and punitive damages, etc.

Its one of the cases where if the photographer properly registered his image, he would have the infringers family jewels in a big vice, and the infringer would be paying the photographer for each squeeze. But since he didn't register, the photographer only has a small pair of tweezers, and the photographer pays $200 an hour for every squeeze which, and it doesn't hurt all that much. I'm sure after talking with his lawyer, they are both wishing the images were properly registered :(

tcphoto1
19th of April 2007 (Thu), 18:16
No, it sounds like he is waiting to get a response, and then act accordingly:



I am sure his lawyer has advised him that mum's the word for now.

It sounded to me that he had sent them an email and was waiting for a reply. If you have an Attorney then you don't communicate with the other side and let them work it out. It also sounded like he loved the sport more than his Intellectual Property. The bottomline is that you've got to protect what is yours and if the thief has been caught, you've got to take a stand. Those t shirts didn't magically appear with his image on them, so standup and take action. If there is no progress in the negotiation, don't post anything.

milleker
19th of April 2007 (Thu), 18:33
Yeah, the shirts are classy. I don't know whats worse - they did it or the t-shirt manufacturer didn't notice the watermark. I mean, who rotated and cropped the image that happened to cut off half the logo? The 'orderer of the shirts' or the shirt designers. I'd be *VERY* interested in knowing that answer, if the shirt makers cropped it (cutting the logo) they could be held accountable for reproducing copyrighted works. Sadly though, it would take a court order to make them fess up and show the original graphic that was sent to them.

sfaust
19th of April 2007 (Thu), 19:29
Sadly though, it would take a court order to make them fess up and show the original graphic that was sent to them.

I believe they could get that through discovery, rather than a court order. A bit easier, but the whole situation is painful anyway. Hopefully, it will turn out well in his favor.

PaintballPhotography.com
19th of April 2007 (Thu), 21:28
But since he didn't register, the photographer only has a small pair of tweezers, and the photographer pays $200 an hour for every squeeze which, and it doesn't hurt all that much. I'm sure after talking with his lawyer, they are both wishing the images were properly registered :(

How do you now my images are not registered?!!….I know I am too nice but I am not dumb. Everything IS properly registered. I have a wonderful intellectual properties lawyer who keeps me on a short leash and keeps all my work properly protected in that department. I have been photographing this sport longer than just about anyone and my images appear regularly in all the magazines so I know what I am doing here…I just want to settle all of this in a rapid and fair manner.
I have been constantly watching this thread but after someone suggested that my work has not been properly protected I felt I had to respond

sfaust
19th of April 2007 (Thu), 22:17
How do you now my images are not registered?!!….

In some early replies, there were mentions that you should register the images right away. I didn't see anything to the contray, so I assumed they were not registered prior to the infringement. And you know what they say about assuming :) My apologies.

So I'm happy to be proven wrong since it really puts you in a great position. And its also a good example on why registering is so important. Things do happen, and people really do infringe on copyright, and some in a big way. I do hope it gets resolved quickly and all parties walk away feeling good about the outcome.

MagicallyDelicious
19th of April 2007 (Thu), 22:22
hope you get this sorted!!

jfrancho
20th of April 2007 (Fri), 11:13
It sounded to me that he had sent them an email and was waiting for a reply. If you have an Attorney then you don't communicate with the other side and let them work it out. It also sounded like he loved the sport more than his Intellectual Property. The bottomline is that you've got to protect what is yours and if the thief has been caught, you've got to take a stand. Those t shirts didn't magically appear with his image on them, so standup and take action. If there is no progress in the negotiation, don't post anything.Three times now he has indicated that he has an intellectual property lawyer and has indicated that the images are indeed registered. All you're doing is making uninformed statements/judgments about the OP's situation. These things take time. PBP will let us know the outcome.

tcphoto1
20th of April 2007 (Fri), 15:04
I've followed the post since the beginning, so I don't need to be lectured on the time table.

jfrancho
23rd of April 2007 (Mon), 20:55
I've followed the post since the beginning, so I don't need to be lectured on the time table.Whatever dude.

knt3424
23rd of April 2007 (Mon), 23:12
I would ask your lawyer about the possibility of settlement WITH a non-disclosure agreement tacked on. Don't know if that's something they can do where the offending party isn't allowed to disclose that the suit was even made. I really don't know ,but I understand your frustration.

I took some pics for a non-for-profit's website, and one of the sponsor's wanted to use some to promote it in their trade magazines. I gave them a couple to choose from, told them it was ok because it was for this particular not-for-profit organization and would promote them, and they had to mention a photo credit to me. They did and everything was great. About six months later, the president of the nfp stopped by with an 'annual report' from the trade magazine company. My photos all over it (13), no mention of my company for photo credit and no mention of the nfp. They produce trade magazines... you KNOW they know better... and did it anyways. I called and talked with the director that I gave the original permission to, expressed my frustrations over what they did, and said in the future to obtain written permission for each project they need photos for. And let it go. I'm still kicking myself. I didn't want to damage my rep or the nfp's rep by dragging anyone into anything like a lawsuit, but I should have gone ahead with it... even if I donated the money to the nfp. I can't think about that and not be angry. And I may give someone permission to use photos or other 'work' to help a nfp, but I will NEVER give out a CD of work to ANYONE without including a document on acceptable use of the work. (I don't even know what this stuff is called, but I'll get something written down!)

If your stuff is good enough to steal, it's good enough to that people will still use you. And besides, these guys are making a healthy buck off your work. It's not like they just used it on an annual report. They are SELLING your work and you aren't getting a dime. You should have received a fee for usage and royalties of sales... don't swallow this today and end up swallowing it everytime you see a t-shirt. <step down off soapbox>

embdude
24th of April 2007 (Tue), 03:43
I hope it works out for you.

I also hope you can share the conclusion with us...

China Man
24th of April 2007 (Tue), 04:05
They have use your pictures yes, but they also did some changes to it i.e. the orange theme and the T-shirt mono color effect. In effect they can say that they have use your picture and created their own art in which have its own orgin.

ssim
24th of April 2007 (Tue), 04:40
They have use your pictures yes, but they also did some changes to it i.e. the orange theme and the T-shirt mono color effect. In effect they can say that they have use your picture and created their own art in which have its own orgin.

Your logic doesn't make sense. They still infringed on his copyright and published (on a tshirt) the likeness of the image.

If I understand your logic then no one would have to pay for images. Just grab a copy and make a change to circumvent having to pay.

Care to explain where you were going with that.

China Man
24th of April 2007 (Tue), 06:51
I am just thinking that yes they have used the photo but they did not just copy and paste and add words.

not saying what the event people did was ok, I am just saying that in terms of law suit or bargain chip it is not that straight forward.

Same as songs and lyrics copyright.

Jason-H
24th of April 2007 (Tue), 07:51
Music lyrics are covered by copyright law also, are they not?

transcend
24th of April 2007 (Tue), 10:37
I am just thinking that yes they have used the photo but they did not just copy and paste and add words.

not saying what the event people did was ok, I am just saying that in terms of law suit or bargain chip it is not that straight forward.

Same as songs and lyrics copyright.

Uh, no. Song Lyrics are covered directly. If you use parts of them in audio you can sample 3 seconds without any lawsuits being brought against you. Otherwise, you get sued. This case is clear cut. The photo was tolen and used illegally. End of story.

chakalakasp
25th of April 2007 (Wed), 18:04
They have use your pictures yes, but they also did some changes to it i.e. the orange theme and the T-shirt mono color effect. In effect they can say that they have use your picture and created their own art in which have its own orgin.

I'm not really a lawyer, but I play one on the internets!

China Man
25th of April 2007 (Wed), 18:45
I have to repeat to that I am not saying what the event people did was right. What they did was wrong and you can tell straight away from the banner and t shirt where the pic is from. But it could be worse, non-crop in full colour and with just the words typed over the orginal picture.

ssim
25th of April 2007 (Wed), 22:16
I have to repeat to that I am not saying what the event people did was right. What they did was wrong and you can tell straight away from the banner and t shirt where the pic is from. But it could be worse, non-crop in full colour and with just the words typed over the orginal picture.

I'm still trying to figure out what your thought process is on this. I'm sort of reading that you feel it is partially ok because they didn't reprint the image verbatim from his file. It doesn't matter if they blocked out his watermark (which they didn't), changed it to a different hue, the fact remains that they stole his image and used its likeness. I'm not sure how it could be worse than someone stealing your image for their gain.

PaintballPhotography.com
26th of April 2007 (Thu), 00:30
IMO the answer to this is very simple….When you download a photo from my site there is a click through agreement before you can proceed with the download. There is a clear violation of this agreement.

The “click through agreement reads:

“Copyright Notice. Paintballphotography.com images are copyrighted. All paintballphotography.com images are free for non-profit use by private individuals. Any other use requires our express written consent. If you agree with these terms, press OK. Otherwise press Cancel.”

morehtml
26th of April 2007 (Thu), 08:11
Well with your full res photos available for download in this day and age I wouldn't be surprised who is using them. They could end up on stock agencies, posted on websites and more. It's copyright infringement but if you give a inch they take a mile. The people selling your stuff need a cease and desist letter from a lawyer if you two can't work out a fair arrangement.

I'm not a lawyer but I believe if the people in these pictures being sold are personally identifiable then a model release would be needed from them before selling the pictures.

lingham
26th of April 2007 (Thu), 14:50
in my opinion this is the deciding factor in all this

http://paintballphotography.com/Public/XPSLCR/QL7P3411.jpg

this t-shirt clearly has your logo on it and any use of this is obviously needing your consent on. its too clear cut for me to be honest

PhotoJourno
26th of April 2007 (Thu), 15:07
The problem all along has been more political rather than legal.

The people he takes photos for, pull a fast one on him. Sure, he can hire Vinnie with his Cadillac, and send everyone to sleep with the fishes. Nice Manly talk.

The real issue is how to sort this -say hey, promoter, you overstepped your bounds- without losing ties to the event, league, maybe even a large part of the industry.

I am worried you are not getting any callbacks. Maybe they are concerned that you are tempted to sue?.. The smartest thing for them at this point is pretend that there is no issue. Maybe you can find a quick third party contact that can freely walk into someone's place and say "Hey, listen to the guy, he is not p_issed, he just wants credit for the photos". And then let you in to explain your side of the story.

Just a thought. Also been with this thread from the start, and certainly hope you get your part, without losing the ability to shoot the events.

Keep us updated.

Pinto
26th of April 2007 (Thu), 17:49
They have use your pictures yes, but they also did some changes to it i.e. the orange theme and the T-shirt mono color effect. In effect they can say that they have use your picture and created their own art in which have its own orgin.

Maybe it will help to understand that under U.S. Copyright law the copyright holder owns rights to the original work and all derivatives.

chakalakasp
26th of April 2007 (Thu), 23:38
The problem all along has been more political rather than legal.

It's rather legal, too, don't you think, with all the lawyers and threats of lawsuits involved?

The people he takes photos for, pull a fast one on him. Sure, he can hire Vinnie with his Cadillac, and send everyone to sleep with the fishes. Nice Manly talk.

The real issue is how to sort this -say hey, promoter, you overstepped your bounds- without losing ties to the event, league, maybe even a large part of the industry.



His attorney can do this for him. It can be built into the settlement.

I am worried you are not getting any callbacks. Maybe they are concerned that you are tempted to sue?.. The smartest thing for them at this point is pretend that there is no issue.

No, considering it's an attorney that's contacting them, the dumbest thing they could do right now is pretend there is no issue. They've got a lawyer beating on their door with an olive branch in one hand and a lawsuit sledgehammer in the other. If they don't answer, they end up getting their door, and maybe their heads bashed in with the hammer.

Lawyers by nature are hired to resolve disputes between parties. This does not have to become a lawsuit, but if the paintball company is retarded enough to pretend that there is no problem, likely it will. And they will likely lose or end up settling for far more than they would have settled for if they never went to court. The attorney fees keep racking up, and will likely be part of any settlement offer.

Maybe you can find a quick third party contact that can freely walk into someone's place

Once you get an attorney, your attorney does the talking. Asking a third party to go around your attorney and make offers for you is, ah, a rather unwise idea.

and say "Hey, listen to the guy, he is not p_issed, he just wants credit for the photos". And then let you in to explain your side of the story.

The original poster does NOT just want credit for his photos, he wants PAYMENT for his photos, and likely a payment several times greater than he would have gotten had he sold them outright.

Billginthekeys
27th of April 2007 (Fri), 10:34
The original poster does NOT just want credit for his photos, he wants PAYMENT for his photos, and likely a payment several times greater than he would have gotten had he sold them outright.

im with you, the OP is a well known and published photographer. this isnt an issue of some poor non profit organization stealing a picture off of someone's myspace, this is a serious money making business stealing one of its own photographer's photos and flaunting it up for sale with his own business name on it! This isnt a matter of credit, this is a matter of he got ripped off. While i sympathise with everyone who doesnt want him to loose his job over this, rolling over and pretending it didnt happen, or having a sit down over tea, is NOT going to solve the problem.

S.Horton
27th of April 2007 (Fri), 11:36
I hope he gets paid, keeps the business, and keeps doing what he loves to do.

DizzyV6P
27th of April 2007 (Fri), 11:41
As an attorney in my day job, I find it pathetic that such a large company blatently stole the OP's pictures. I've seen the OP's pictures before and they are astounding. I understand that its a small industry and he's afraid that he won't be allowed to photograph events anymore. But he will have to consider this. If he allows this to continue (the stealing of his copyrighted work), then world will spread to every other paintball event that its ok to steal this guys photos and he won't do a thing about it.

Some of it is educational and a lot of event promoters and producers don't understand copyright laws, so don't always assume that its common knowledge. It could be something as innocent as they found this image on the internet and just decided to use it, not thinking that anyone would notice.

Hiring a lawyer will do many things. We will contact the company in writing about their violation and demand that they cease and desist in using any of the images in any future events until this is settled. The letter should also include a dollar figure on how much the OP believes he is owed. They have 30 days to respond back to me to discuss the issue. The letter will also make it known that a lawsuit will be filed in XX amount of days if this issue is not resolved. The letter is usually sent either certified mail return receipt or UPS or FedEx, anything that requires a signature that shows they received the letter.

After the letter is sent, the violators will almost always respond back within a day or 2 of receiving the letter. Most smart people will negotiate a settlement and work out a license agreement. The stupid ones will hee and haw and try to wiggle out of it using various excuses. BTW, modifying the original picture does not protect you from copyright infringement. Most people are fairly reasonable and will settle with you and everyone wil be happy. But you'll never know until you get a lawyer to deal with this. It has been published in some medium...either on here, on his website, or in magazines...its protected whether Federally registered or not. If it wasn't registered w/ the copyright office, then he can still sue in California court.

Judging by his non-response, I am assuming that his attorney advised him not to talk about this until everything is settled. Which is exactly what he should do. The last thing the OP needs is to have any sort of deal fall apart because of us gossiping about it on this forum. ;)

It's almost May now so hopefully he'll have this settled soon. Good Luck!

3Honu
29th of April 2007 (Sun), 20:57
Gary,

I just saw this thread. Dude! Some people have some cajones!

To everyone else, I can say that Gary is right about this being a small industry with few major players that control so much. Gary has every right to be worried about not being let into some events anymore. People in this sport are seriously that petty. All of this depsite the fact he is the best paintball photog in the business. He is also a seriously nice guy. And I'm not just aying that to get you at the next Big Game Gary because you are already inked :D. Too bad I don't run tournies big guy! But, I might have a scenario for you in the future.

Anyways, I know you will handle this with the utmost aplomb you are known for.

PhotoJourno
6th of May 2007 (Sun), 03:23
Gary,I just saw this thread. Dude! Some people have some cajones!...

Cajones = 'Boxes', in Spanish (or Drawers, as in a Dresser)

Cojones = 'Balls' In Spanish (as In 'what they did was pretty ballsy')

And that Gentlemen and ladies and other friendly mutants, is MJ Gravina's Language lesson for 2007. :)

ifonline
8th of May 2007 (Tue), 21:22
Hm... so you're saying that some people have boxes, eh? Intriguing...

sfaust
9th of May 2007 (Wed), 13:36
Hm... so you're saying that some people have boxes, eh? Intriguing...

Now I know why they are square!!! Thanks!

;)

basroil
9th of May 2007 (Wed), 13:55
Now I know why they are square!!! Thanks!

;)
my boxes are rectangular... but at least it seems that this issue is being hammered out properly

3Honu
9th of May 2007 (Wed), 14:08
Cajones = "Boxes", in Spanish (or drawers, as in a dresser)

Cojones = "Balls" In Spanish (as in "What they did was pretty ballsy"),

and that gentlemen, ladies and other friendly mutants, is MJ Gravina's language lesson for 2007. :)

Thanks MJ. Next time I accidentally mispell a word from a foreign language I will make sure to drop you a line.:rolleyes:

psychowarden
9th of May 2007 (Wed), 18:44
Also being a paintball photog...I know that there are very few of us. I had one of my photos published in PGI, and was not given credit for it, as compensation for their mistake, they gave me a years worth subscription for free. But they didn't really make that much of a profit out of my picture, as it was just a small picture in an article, whereas your picture is being used as a large banner and as a t-shirt logo, which they are making a good amount of money on.

I'm sure that you will be able to work this out peacefully with the event promoters without having to come to legal action. But, the best of luck to you anyways.

P.S. I love the quality of your pictures, I bet I've got a couple of your pictures up on my walls and don't even know it.

3Honu
9th of May 2007 (Wed), 19:40
The paintball media is extremely incompetent and greedy. I used to write for some of the magazines but stopped after getting really late payments and my articles were never credited to me properly. This is just another example of that.

Dale Miller
10th of May 2007 (Thu), 08:31
This thread has been the cause for a lot of discussion around our office, as we are incountering similar situations. A promoter I work with has asked me to send some pictures to a friend who is going to test market the as wall clocks and such. I was under the impression that if succesful there would be an agreement made as to my piece of the action. But this weekend the promoter gave me a few of the sample pieces and implied that this was my payment for the use of the pictures, and that they intended to market them on a large scale. He even went so far as to use photos I had sold to my customers in this project.

PhotosGuy
10th of May 2007 (Thu), 09:23
I was under the impression that if succesful there would be an agreement made as to my piece of the action. I hope you will impress something on paper next time, and get a signature? ;)

I assume that they don't have anything assigning rights to them? Register them now, & if they use them for their marketing, wait 'till they've printed 100,000 brochures...

Dale Miller
10th of May 2007 (Thu), 09:52
I am in the process of contacting the person useing the pictures and also getting the copyrights in order. My point is that sometimes we get wraped up in the publicity and the use of our work that we forget that it is OUR work. Thissame promoter used my pictures last year for some T shirts and I never even thought of it as directly profiting from my photos.

Steve Parr
10th of May 2007 (Thu), 09:56
Any updated status on the original issue?

tomd
10th of May 2007 (Thu), 11:14
Crazy thread here.

OP: if you "settle" for a fraction of what they "should" owe you, why do you feel that your photo. services will be used in the future. In other words, just because you are nice to them and don't go after punitive damages, and all the other rights that are yours; they may not be nice to you. They could easily decide in a few weeks, etc after the settlement that they don't care to use you anymore and have found a different photog.

PaintballPhotography.com
14th of May 2007 (Mon), 14:21
Well I settled this about one week ago, my original plan was not to post anything about our settlement and hope that this thread would just fade away. But since you have all be so helpful to me I felt you all deserved to hear how this all was settled.

What did I demand? What did I get? …..

I decided that all I wanted was a simple apology. What I got was an apology and a friendship and relationship reinstated…in the end that’s all I wanted. After several months of agonizing and soul searching I simply decided I had had enough of all of this. I talked to a lot of lawyers, carefully read all you helpful posts, and I learned a lot about the law and myself

The sport I specialize in all ready has too many lawsuits and I just did not want to add another one…I felt it was just not worth it. In the end I may have made a perhaps a few thousand dollars, spend months perhaps years in litigation and then a few thousand dollars more and another law suit to get back on the field to do what I love.

In the end all of this would probably hurt the sport and the NPPL (National Professional Paintball League) would end up rising what they charge players to compete. I firmly believe that I will make more money in the long run in this small sport by what I am doing.

I had to remind myself why I shoot a sport that is so punishing to photographers and their equipment (I spend thousands in Canon repairs and have received hundreds of bruises). It’s not for the money, or the publications (This year alone I have had over 100 images published in all the major paintball magazines) or the notoriety in this niche sport (look at this http://www.paintballphotography.com/geomap.aspx). At the big international events people have actually asked me to autograph some of the magazines my pictures have appeared in! The reason I do this is quite simple…I just simply like it; I am good at it, and its fun!

Judging from the comments I have gotten on this forum, mainly in the spots section I must be pretty good at what I do. There are some tremendously talented and knowledgeable people here and I have never gotten a negative comment or critic of my photography on this forum! I find this amazing

Came me foolish or naive …Flame away:evil: …But I really do not care because I am going to continue doing what I love to do, .BTW thank you all …look at my photos in the sports section ( I have started posting again) and see you on the field

Gary
http://www.paintballphotography.com

http://www.paintballphotography.com/Public/Photos/Tampa%20NPPL%20lens%20hit%20.4.gif

ryleung
14th of May 2007 (Mon), 15:46
Gary, I respect your decision to not press any charges. However, I must say that I do not agree with what you are doing at all. The NPPL's reputation is notorious for a reason, and your lack of action to teach them a lesson through the sure-win lawsuit will only result in other photographers such as yourself to continue getting ripped off in the future.

You wrote in your post that You got "an apology and a friendship and relationship reinstated". Did you really think these guys are your friends? I dunno about you, but my friends don't steal from me. And judging by how frequently these guys were in touch with you during the lawsuit... well, I rest my case.

Good luck in your future endeavors. I hope you wouldn't get ripped off by these crooks again, but I wouldn't count on it.

-Lik

adamo99
14th of May 2007 (Mon), 15:49
Gary, I respect your decision to not press any charges. However, I must say that I do not agree with what you are doing at all. The NPPL's reputation is notorious for a reason, and your lack of action to teach them a lesson through the sure-win lawsuit will only result in other photographers such as yourself to continue getting ripped off in the future.

You wrote in your post that You got "an apology and a friendship and relationship reinstated". Did you really think these guys are your friends? I dunno about you, but my friends don't steal from me.

Good luck in your future endeavors. I hope you wouldn't get ripped off by these crooks again, but I wouldn't count on it.

-Lik

My sentiments exactly.

ssim
14th of May 2007 (Mon), 15:55
The reason I do this is quite simple…I just simply like it; I am good at it, and its fun!

This says it all and congratulations for making a decision that you are happy with. I for one will not flame you. There are many more things in life than money.

tomd
14th of May 2007 (Mon), 15:58
Gary,
Thanks for posting. I hope that in the end, you are more respected by the organizations and they will continue to use your highly regarded skills and you will now make some $$ off their promotion.

Good Luck!
Tom

tcphoto1
14th of May 2007 (Mon), 16:10
Gary, I respect your decision to not press any charges. However, I must say that I do not agree with what you are doing at all. The NPPL's reputation is notorious for a reason, and your lack of action to teach them a lesson through the sure-win lawsuit will only result in other photographers such as yourself to continue getting ripped off in the future.

You wrote in your post that You got "an apology and a friendship and relationship reinstated". Did you really think these guys are your friends? I dunno about you, but my friends don't steal from me. And judging by how frequently these guys were in touch with you during the lawsuit... well, I rest my case.

Good luck in your future endeavors. I hope you wouldn't get ripped off by these crooks again, but I wouldn't count on it.

-Lik
ditto

milleker
14th of May 2007 (Mon), 16:11
Thanks for the update, glad you came to a decision that not only felt right to you but made sense. I don't know the organization in question, but I hope your make nice session included an idea of what would happen if it happened again..

kona77
14th of May 2007 (Mon), 16:33
The bottom line is that you did what you are comfortable with. You asked for opinions, received many, then made your final decision. It is a lesson learned and best of luck.

milleker,
I see you are an Orioles fan and just wanted to complimnet you on 8.75 innings of great baseball versus the Red Sox on Sunday. (snicker snicker):)

milleker
14th of May 2007 (Mon), 16:46
Yeah, thinking of removing the avatar. At least it wasn't a grand salami like the start of the season. I'd rather give up Home Runs than walk runners into scoring. We've never had any pitching - oh well, maybe next year? :)


milleker,
I see you are an Orioles fan and just wanted to complimnet you on 8.75 innings of great baseball versus the Red Sox on Sunday. (snicker snicker):)

LBaldwin
15th of May 2007 (Tue), 13:22
Hey Paintball,

It is afterall your decision. I hope it works out for you as well. If you do become the large fish in the pond then it may eventually work to your advantage I just hope the offending parties get a clue about the issues at hand, good luck. No flames from me, I see that you made an informed decision.

Les

Mike R
15th of May 2007 (Tue), 16:47
I'm glad that it was resolved to your satisfaction.

sfaust
15th of May 2007 (Tue), 18:57
I'm glad that it was resolved to your satisfaction.

Exactly. He did what was best for his situation, and you can't fault him for doing whats right for him.

I personally wouldn't have let him off that easy, since the bahavior noted here shows he clearly has only his own best interest at heart, photographer be damned. Thats not a friendly relationship by any means. I would rather get whats due in a clear cut infringement case, even if it meant I had to take up shooting another sport.

This is also a good example of why its best to diversify your work. Whether its one or two large clients, an organization, sport, or speciality. Too many eggs in one basket isn't a healty business.

Gary, I'm glad its over, and you can move on and get back to doing what you love to do. A huge distraction like this really hurts. Looking forward to seeing more of your work.

3Honu
16th of May 2007 (Wed), 03:01
All I care about is that gary is happy with the outcome. - See you at the big game.

Matatazela
22nd of May 2007 (Tue), 08:04
Good to see this finally put to bed. I hope that you get more shoots out of this, and that your work and the work of other photographers is at least respected more by the people that were exposed to this debacle. Hopefully the future will see you doing more of what you love!

Lghtning4u
22nd of May 2007 (Tue), 11:17
Copyright infringement needs to be taken alot more serious than it's been. It's our only protection as artists.

Josh101
23rd of May 2007 (Wed), 05:52
my advise its to prevent this type of thing from happening ever again and next time make your watermark large print directly across the main image so that there is no way to cover it over or erase it with out compromiseing the image

Tony Starks
23rd of May 2007 (Wed), 19:58
you can see his watermark on the tshirt!
that sucks!
milk those theives for waht you can get!

DiscoLizard
23rd of May 2007 (Wed), 22:34
Guys... this thread is over.

Let it die already. The issue has been resolved to the satisfaction of both parties involved.

3Honu
25th of May 2007 (Fri), 03:32
I talked to Gary yesterday on the phone and he is happy with the result. This thread may die peacefully. :D

Sandra Gabler
31st of March 2008 (Mon), 04:12
I would say you send them an invoice for that, charging a bit less than usual and explaining in a very friendly letter that they seem to have forgotten in this case to get the rights for the photo and that your normal price would be a gazillion dollars but for both sides to settle matters easily you just charge ... whatever.

Then see how they react.
And your picture is stunning!!! Maybe you should watermark it differently, that one was way too easy to get rid of.

ChrisRabior
31st of March 2008 (Mon), 08:29
People obviously aren't reading this in it's entirety anymore... considering the OP came to a settlement that he's happy with, and announced it to us, and had a few more people post that the op had made his announcement. Yet still, we're getting rambling about what he should do and why.

Seriously, time to lock the thread.