(UK) Advice on mis-credited shot in press

[pxl8]

Hi,

At the weekend I was asked to take a shot of the members of a local running club just before a race started. The tog from the local paper had asked them to turn up for a shot but then didn't arrive himself so I agreed to take the shot and send it in. I emailed it over on Monday with a note explaining what had happened and made it clear that the shot could only be used if a credit to me was given. The shot was in today's paper but credited to the staff tog instead.

Now I know that under UK law the moral right to a credit is exempt when the shot is used in the press to report current events (hence my print with credit or don't use conditiion in the submission) but what should I do now they have given the credit for my shot to their own tog? Have they fallen foul of the law and if so which one?

Usually they offer a free advert which is no good to me, wrong market and I've already got one owed from a previous error they made. This time I'd rather see them pay for the use (something they never do for submitted shots) to teach them a valuable lesson. I am very annoyed that my shot was credited to their tog who didn't do his job, they've not even had the manners to say thanks for helping out.

I'm interested in anything that will strengthen my argument as to why they should pay for their mistake....

Cheers!

[Box Brownie]

I know not what if any the relevent law(s) may be but were I in your shoes I would write to the Editor in Chief and the papers owners stating the specifics of the situation and if you are correct that payment is unlikely I would press (no pun intended) for them to republish the image in the next issue but (presumably this was the sports section?) larger (2 or 3 times e.g. 1/4 page) & with an apology giving the correct attribution. In addition I would remind them that I was the copyright owner and that they have no 'extra' rights to the image other than the editorial/news usage ~ the reason I raise this one is that my local promotes the sale of the images seen in the paper.

No publication likes bad publicity, however by keeping your cool in dealing with them but showing them you mean business in a professional manner you could state that if it is not resolved to an agreed mutual satisfaction you will be taking the matter further.

For the record I have never had images published but I try to keep track of these matters and far too many publications - web and print - are playing fast & loose with the rights of the photographer and other 'authors'.

I surmise that the UK law is similar to USA etc in that to claim damages you will have show a loss of income as a result of their action.

Lastly, coming back to whether you can extract payment ~ well you could simply send them a bill (by recorded delivery when the post gowes back to work ;) ) with a time limit for payment and then take them to the small claims court because in the very least they ignored yout 'attached' note about your terms for the image usage.

Do update with the outcome? Best of luck

[Tall_Paul_2000]

I think you just have to put this down to experience.

Firstly, you shouldn't be offering pictures for free to a paper, they have a budget, let them pay. Offering pictures for free undermines other professionals in the area. Ok, it might not have been a huge amount that would have offered, however in some instances, it is the principal more than the actual amount.

Secondly, I doubt that you can extract payment. Your agreement didn't state that any form of payment should be made......the error in this instance of the miscrediting of the photo is the underlying issue and is just that, an error. I would be very surprised if a small claims court upheld your claim, based upon an editorial mistake.

Did you fully caption the image with a picture credit in? If not then again, it doesn't help your cause - when page layouts are being done, unless there is firstly space for a credit and secondly a credit in the caption info, then your picture will go either uncredited - or, in this case, they will assume that it was the staffer who took it.

To Box Brownie's comment:

"but showing them you mean business in a professional manner you could state that if it is not resolved to an agreed mutual satisfaction you will be taking the matter further."

"I surmise that the UK law is similar to USA etc in that to claim damages you will have show a loss of income as a result of their action."

Two thing strongly undermine this arguement - no professional would ever offer picture for credit only.

Also by offering a picture for credit only, you are suggesting that it has either no current value to you, or you expect no income from it. Arguing that uncredited usage of the picture resulted in loss of income would be rather futile I feel.

Sorry to be quite so blunt about this, however I have had quite a few dealings with both national and regional papers recently. I suspect this is similar advice to that you would get from other people within similar dealings.

By all means, raise their attention to it, but don't expect them to run a large scale retraction or republishing of the photo - the most you will hope for from a printed correction would be a couple of lines at the bottom of the column - assuming they even did that much.

The key take aways from this should be not to offer free pictures to papers - local, regional or national......

And besides, the only people who ever look at photo credits are other photographers......the average reader only spends around 0.75 seconds actually looking at an image, let alone looking for who took it!!

[pxl8]

I think you just have to put this down to experience.

Firstly, you shouldn't be offering pictures for free to a paper, they have a budget, let them pay. Offering pictures for free undermines other professionals in the area. Ok, it might not have been a huge amount that would have offered, however in some instances, it is the principal more than the actual amount.

Ok, I'll clear this point up. The paper in question doesn't pay for shots, ever. They expect photos to be included with articles ready written. They fill the pages with requests to "send us your pictures by MMS, email, etc." in every issue.

Normally I wouldn't even think about submitting a shot but on this occasion I was asked to do so as a favour by the running club who I do work with, I handle the photography for their races. I knew I wouldn't get paid for the shot but I was helping my client out after the paper's tog had let them down. Given past experience with the paper I worded the submission so it was clear that if they used it they also agreed to print a credit. And yes, it had all the exif and IPTC tags set.

The shot has little or no value but that isn't the issue. It was their photographer who wanted the shot and asked the club to arrange a photo call for the members. When then photographer was a no show I stepped in and did the club and the paper a favour. Clearly they wanted the shot, they did print it after all. So my issue is that they could have at least shown the slightest bit of thanks in the form of a credit as a professional courtesy.

The paper also prints a monthly glossy of the social events in the area. I have a deal with the editor, I get set up as the tog for black tie events, etc. where I make my own money selling shots on the night plus handing out cards and getting the occasional wedding job. The mag gets some nice shots of everyone looking smart and having a good time. I don't get paid a bean by the mag but every month there's pages of shots with a big old credit for me, my website and phone number. If I didn't do these jobs then the staff togs would be going - something they moan about so I'm doing them a favour as well. So sometimes doing free shots does work well for all concerned...

The past experience I mentioned above is from a few weeks back when they ran a wedding supplement. I had recently done a promotional bridal shoot with some local wedding suppliers and the paper wanted to use one of my shots for the cover. I agreed in exchange for a free editorial feature in the supplement. They used the shot but missed out the editorial and of course no credit.

Now the law says I have a "moral right" to be identified as the "author" unless the shot is being used to report current events in a newspaper, etc. That exemption applies for the shot of the running club but not the cover of the wedding supplement and that's a conversation I'll have with them tomorrow. The latest problem with printing the wrong credit only weakens their position.

[pxl8]

Update: They've now agreed to pay for using the shot of the running club and want to arrange a meeting to discuss how they can compensate me for the other losses.