Wow, they printed my Photographs without asking me!

[Vineet666]

Hi guys,

This is a classic case of "Copyright" crap that we keep reading on the internet but never take it seriously as I was just starting out in Photography back then. I just saw that a popular Rock magazine in India printed 5 Photographs taken by me, without even asking/paying me! It was a Rock Show I covered about a year back for a friend's Rock band and they took my Photographs on a CD. They did give me "Photo Credit" but that's not what we want as professional photographers, right?

Please clarify what actions should I take keeping in mind the following:

1. My pictures are/were not copyrighted. But I had a "Copyright Vineet Modi Photography" watermark below each photograph, just to make it look professional and scare people from copying it, but they smartly removed the bottom completely and printed them!

2. They are my friends (the band members and the magazine designer) and I don't want to spoil my relationship as I have a written a Photo article for them in the past, for which they paid me and I have future business prospects with them.

3. I am just about to start shooting Rock bands professionally on a regular basis and will be doing their portfolios and giving pictures on a Disk. What are the things I need to keep in mind so that this does not happen again?

Thanks!
- Vineet

[Vineet666]

Here's the article I saw on Facebook. I don't have the actual copy with me now, but I can see there is a Photo Credit at the right hand bottom.

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/9702/picture2xuv.png

[EtherealZee]

Put the watermark over the middle of the pic?

Z...

[Vineet666]

Yea, but what about the Photos I will be giving to the bands in future? Do I make them sign a contract? I don't have a Photography business of my own, but if something legal has to be done; I'm all up for starting one in order to save my integrity and that of other fellow Photographers.

[DDCSD]

Yes, you make the band sign a contract stating exactly what they can and cannot use the photos for.


Under what terms did you give them the CD under?

[RDKirk]

If India is a signatory of the Berne Conventions, your work is copyrighted to you from the moment you created it. India may have a requirement to register your copyright in some way in order to take legal advantage of it. But very likely, you can do that now at least to prevent any future infringements.

Next time, always provide a specific notice of the uses you are licensing to anyone you deliver images to.

[basroil]

All I can say is welcome to the club.

And that unless they sell that magazine in the US (or your country of work), you won't be able to push forward with any legal action. Best course, if you have work lined up with them, is to bill them for the usage when you send your bill for the new work.

[Vineet666]

Thanks. I think charging the magazine for the next assignment, including the fees of this issue is a good idea or I will simply over-charge them for one assignment and tell them the reason. I will also shoot the band very soon, so I will ask them to pay some extra money for their portfolio. I'm not a greedy person, I just did their shoot out of friendship and I was learning back them - so there was NO contract/agreement involved. But again, its a matter of ethics, they should have atleast informed me before sending the pictures for publishing.

Can someone please post some sample conditions which I should ask the bands to sign in the next contract? I have my first shoot coming up soon and I want to clear things up right from the beginning, so it becomes a habit. Also, in case bands DO want to use the pictures to be published in a magazine (which I know they will), how much should I ask them to pay me in that case, or should I ask the magazine to pay me for the pics?

[tim]

Send them an invoice and a polite letter.

[DennisW1]

Hi guys,

This is a classic case of "Copyright" crap that we keep reading on the internet but never take it seriously as I was just starting out in Photography back then. I just saw that a popular Rock magazine in India printed 5 Photographs taken by me, without even asking/paying me! It was a Rock Show I covered about a year back for a friend's Rock band and they took my Photographs on a CD. They did give me "Photo Credit" but that's not what we want as professional photographers, right?

Please clarify what actions should I take keeping in mind the following:

1. My pictures are/were not copyrighted. But I had a "Copyright Vineet Modi Photography" watermark below each photograph, just to make it look professional and scare people from copying it, but they smartly removed the bottom completely and printed them!

2. They are my friends (the band members and the magazine designer) and I don't want to spoil my relationship as I have a written a Photo article for them in the past, for which they paid me and I have future business prospects with them.

3. I am just about to start shooting Rock bands professionally on a regular basis and will be doing their portfolios and giving pictures on a Disk. What are the things I need to keep in mind so that this does not happen again?

Thanks!
- Vineet

Your "friends" have already "spoiled the relationship" by deliberately removing your copyright watermarks and printing them without your permission and without giving you proper compensation for them. Where you go with that is up to you, but if you don't speak up now you're going to give the impression that what they did was ok and frankly you'll be giving yourself the reputation of giving your work away.

That doesn't mean the matter can't be handled tactfully. I'd suggest you put together an invoice for what you consider fair compensation for the use of your photos in their magazine and present it to them during a face-to-face meeting to discuss the situation.

[jbimages]

Vineet, According to Google you are in New Delhi so Indian Copyright Law is the applicable one. The Indian Copyright Act is based on the British Act, not the American one. There are some differences so its worthwhile reading it to check your options. You can find some details here. (http://copyright.gov.in/)

India is a member of the Berne Convention of 1886 (as modified at Paris in 1971) so your work is protected by copyright from the moment you create the image.

You need to consider how you came to photograph the band. If you were asked to do it by the band or magazine an argument could be made that the photographs were works made for hire.

In cases of works made for hire, the provider of the work is considered to be the author, so, if the band or magazine commissioned you to create the images, they hold the copyright. An example of this would be a bride and groom who commission a photographer to shoot their wedding. If the photographer held the rights to the photographs, then the wedding couple would not have the right to reproduce their photos. However, since the rights to the photos actually belong to the commissioning couple, they can make as many copies as they please to send to their friends and family.

This also exists in Australian Copyright law.

Remember I am not writing about American Copyright Law.

[Atlandis]

Hi guys,

This is a classic case of "Copyright" crap that we keep reading on the internet but never take it seriously as I was just starting out in Photography back then. I just saw that a popular Rock magazine in India printed 5 Photographs taken by me, without even asking/paying me! It was a Rock Show I covered about a year back for a friend's Rock band and they took my Photographs on a CD. They did give me "Photo Credit" but that's not what we want as professional photographers, right?

Please clarify what actions should I take keeping in mind the following:

1. My pictures are/were not copyrighted. But I had a "Copyright Vineet Modi Photography" watermark below each photograph, just to make it look professional and scare people from copying it, but they smartly removed the bottom completely and printed them!

2. They are my friends (the band members and the magazine designer) and I don't want to spoil my relationship as I have a written a Photo article for them in the past, for which they paid me and I have future business prospects with them.

3. I am just about to start shooting Rock bands professionally on a regular basis and will be doing their portfolios and giving pictures on a Disk. What are the things I need to keep in mind so that this does not happen again?

Thanks!
- Vineet


I am not sure if u over reacted as this people are your friends.. But I can say that your friends were rude (in a point) by manipulating the images without asking u.

All my friends ask me. Or I offer them if they love it.

But we Greeks always say.. work with friendship does not exist.. that means.. maybe professionally ur worse enemy or fear is your best friend.. ahmmm.. I hope you took the teaching too

regards.

[EveryMilesAMemory]

Let me get this straight? You call both of these people friends (Band & Magazine) yet these friends took pictures you took and printed them without giving you credit.

Here's what I'd do, I'd start burning copies of their music and giving it away to everyone you know, I'd then start reprinting articles from the magazine on my own website claiming it was yours.

See how long before these friends hand you a invoice or take action.

Like the old saying goes "With friends like these, who needs enemies?"

[Vineet666]

Yes, I totally agree with you guys, this magazine has a spoilt reputation when it comes to payment, reason being its the first and amongst the only few rock magazines in India (monopoly). The last article I did for them, it took me 3 months to get my payment. As far as the band is concerned, these people probably didn't even realize the Photographs have 'money value'. There are very few good Photographers in India who click Rock bands for a living (because it will buy them only a bicycle) and so they just called me and I went.

But again, its my fault too. I should have had an agreement signed before giving the Photographs (which I'll do from now on). But I'll be meeting the magazine and the band members for a gig next week, so I'll take this up with them face-to-face. I'll make sure I get compensated - either directly, or indirectly by asking them to give me an assignment and include this fee with the new one! ;)

JD: Thanks for sharing that copyright link! I've bookmarked it for future reference :)

Just one query - do you guys in your countries need to be registered as Photographers before you can make a contract with your individual clients? How does the tax work out in this case, because if you raise an invoice in the name of someone, it would attract service tax or TDS - Tax Deducted at Source, by the corporate clients or individuals, as the case may be.

[jbimages]

Just one query - do you guys in your countries need to be registered as Photographers before you can make a contract with your individual clients? How does the tax work out in this case, because if you raise an invoice in the name of someone, it would attract service tax or TDS - Tax Deducted at Source, by the corporate clients or individuals, as the case may be.


That's another question where an answer depends on the country. Over here we don't have a service tax, but we have a GST, which may or may not be added to the invoice, depending on the whether the person giving the service is registered for GST. There is no specific Photographer registration.

[Analog6]

Don't give phots without your watermark in the centre in future. In my experience, if people get something for notheing that's the value they give it. Charge them for 'clean' photos and put 'not to be reproduced without permission' on the invoice.

[Vineet666]

^ Yes, I'll do that in future. Even if I'm clicking pictures for friends - i'll put a wartermark right on the centre, or even on their bloody face if need be, and if they ask me for a clean photo - I'll say you'll have to clean your wallet for that!

[Atlandis]

Just one query - do you guys in your countries need to be registered as Photographers before you can make a contract with your individual clients? How does the tax work out in this case, because if you raise an invoice in the name of someone, it would attract service tax or TDS - Tax Deducted at Source, by the corporate clients or individuals, as the case may be.


Unfortunately YES, in my country you have to register as a photographer..

That’s totally bad for photographers as ANYBODY can be a photographer, designer, etc etc.. They don’t care if you have any degree for these occupations but only to tax you for it, when you register.



I am talking about my country, but I believe many others got that to.

[jbimages]

Unfortunately YES, in my country you have to register as a photographer..




and that country is...?

[Atlandis]

and that country is...?

Greece

I studied photography though 9 years ago :) and the new generation does that as well... But those who act and work as photographers officially are more than the ones who study it. it’s not a problem though but the true problem is, if qualifications (studies) not needed, many work and paid as photographers unofficially and that damages us.

[DDCSD]

But are you really "registering as a photographer" or are you simply getting a tax license and putting photographer as your occupation?

Here in the US (South Dakota specifically), you need to get a sales tax license to conduct business as a photographer. This is only because the state requires you to collect sales tax when you render a service or product at the retail level. All you have to do is apply for the license, there is no requirement for a degree or anything else. You don't even need to own a camera.


Why on earth should you be required to have a degree to be a paid photographer? It ain't exactly brain surgery. No one is going to die or be injured if you take a bad photo of them.

I don't see what the "problem" is?

How is it bad for photographers?

[Atlandis]

But are you really "registering as a photographer" or are you simply getting a tax license and putting photographer as your occupation?

Here in the US (South Dakota specifically), you need to get a sales tax license to conduct business as a photographer. This is only because the state requires you to collect sales tax when you render a service or product at the retail level. All you have to do is apply for the license, there is no requirement for a degree or anything else. You don't even need to own a camera.


Why on earth should you be required to have a degree to be a paid photographer? It ain't exactly brain surgery. No one is going to die or be injured if you take a bad photo of them.

I don't see what the "problem" is?

How is it bad for photographers?



No, in my country "at least" you begin a company in your name with the subject of photography and printing images.

Then you have to buy your equipment and start working.

If you don’t want to have a store "selling cameras and papers" when you registering the company (your name), you have to register a space, like a house, room, storage room.. whatever, as your work space.

and you are ready.

When I did that, I asked them if they need to see my qualifications but their answer was negative about it. No need to saw any qualification for this occupation.

Videographers as well… I know a videographer in my town that he studied religion studies.. lol


I hate that.

It is bad because we studied that and we invested in photography. Other people just didn’t make it in their main professions and they charge cheaper (most of the times.. MUCH CHEAPER) than anybody else.

So we lose jobs because the prices are not balanced and not controllable. The system that denies qualifications it gives motives to many just to earn fast money without even paying tax.. So we have to reduce prices, equipment cost and all the rest to be able deal with them.

Most of people and I am not talking about HUGE companies, looking for cheaper prices and not for the best equipment and result. And there is the huge problem.

I know some photographers doing weddings with a compact video camera!! and they crop images from the video!!!!! as photographs. So they earn double. videographers and photographers job.

its not under control I am afraid.

another example and I will give you REAL prices... They asked me an offer about studio product photography. 250 products and my offer was 350 euro with 5dmarkII, studio flash heads.. etc etc... but somebody gave an offer for 50 euro with a compact camera (I saw the exif from their website). So i lost the job.

so tell me. I am wrong? I was expensive?

[DDCSD]

No, in my country "at least" you begin a company in your name with the subject of photography and printing images.

Then you have to buy your equipment and start working.

If you don’t want to have a store "selling cameras and papers" when you registering the company (your name), you have to register a space, like a house, room, storage room.. whatever, as your work space.

and you are ready.

When I did that, I asked them if they need to see my qualifications but their answer was negative about it. No need to saw any qualification for this occupation.

Videographers as well… I know a videographer in my town that he studied religion studies.. lol


I hate that.

It is bad because we studied that and we invested in photography. Other people just didn’t make it in their main professions and they charge cheaper (most of the times.. MUCH CHEAPER) than anybody else.

So we lose jobs because the prices are not balanced and not controllable. The system that denies qualifications it gives motives to many just to earn fast money without even paying tax.. So we have to reduce prices, equipment cost and all the rest to be able deal with them.

Most of people and I am not talking about HUGE companies, looking for cheaper prices and not for the best equipment and result. And there is the huge problem.

I know some photographers doing weddings with a compact video camera!! and they crop images from the video!!!!! as photographs. So they earn double. videographers and photographers job.

its not under control I am afraid.

another example and I will give you REAL prices... They asked me an offer about studio product photography. 250 products and my offer was 350 euro with 5dmarkII, studio flash heads.. etc etc... but somebody gave an offer for 50 euro with a compact camera (I saw the exif from their website). So i lost the job.

so tell me. I am wrong? I was expensive?


Yes you are wrong. You were apparently too expensive for that client. Nothing you can do about someone not willing to pay fair prices for a professional product.


Stop trying to compete on price and start competing on quality. If someone is willing to hire a "photographer" that uses stills from a video camera, you wouldn't want them as a client anyways. Same goes for the product photography client.


I'd love to get into this more, but this is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy off topic.

[Adama]

Yes, you make the band sign a contract stating exactly what they can and cannot use the photos for.


Under what terms did you give them the CD under?

Ditto. Exactly what I did when I shot an upcoming band that I KNEW was going to be big (and they're currently proving my prediction true). Basically said that my images were for personal use only and any other use required another contract entirely.