Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
Thread started 12 Jul 2014 (Saturday) 22:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

legal specialization?

 
MrClark7
Goldmember
Avatar
1,562 posts
Likes: 543
Joined Dec 2011
     
Jul 12, 2014 22:52 |  #1

sooo, anyone now of a lawyer specializing in violation of copy rights using images and not paying for them? About 30 plus vehicles with 50 images per auto were used on internet to sell autos. I was never paid for services under 1099. All auto were sold with use of photos. And because of type of dealership, Almost all autos sales happen from ads. As they are all stored in a warehouse until buyer comes and looks. Very little tire kickers.


Canon 1Dmark3, 6D, 17/40L, 24/70 L, 70/200 is f4, sigma 50 1.4
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,601 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 156
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Jul 12, 2014 23:15 |  #2

MrClark7 wrote in post #17028030 (external link)
sooo, anyone now of a lawyer specializing in violation of copy rights using images and not paying for them? About 30 plus vehicles with 50 images per auto were used on internet to sell autos. I was never paid for services under 1099. All auto were sold with use of photos. And because of type of dealership, Almost all autos sales happen from ads. As they are all stored in a warehouse until buyer comes and looks. Very little tire kickers.

...can you reword this? It doesn't make a lot of sense. What exactly happened again?


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MrClark7
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,562 posts
Likes: 543
Joined Dec 2011
     
Jul 12, 2014 23:23 |  #3

i was hired under 1099 to work for a company shooting auto for dealerships. I was sent to a dealer and actually shot 10 to 15 cars a day for 12 days. About 50 images per auto and then they were used to sell autos on there website and ebay. I was never paid. Agreement was $20.00 per car. i have all originals still. How dealership operates is mainly internet. So without images public generally would not know of any car in inventory. So without my images autos would not sell or would be sent back to auction after a period of time. I worked for them for about 3 months and was paid for work with other dealerships until my last one worked. the one I am refering to. Sorry if still vague.


Canon 1Dmark3, 6D, 17/40L, 24/70 L, 70/200 is f4, sigma 50 1.4
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,601 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 156
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Jul 12, 2014 23:27 |  #4

MrClark7 wrote in post #17028066 (external link)
i was hired under 1099 to work for a company shooting auto for dealerships. I was sent to a dealer and actually shot 10 to 15 cars a day for 12 days. About 50 images per auto and then they were used to sell autos on there website and ebay. I was never paid. Agreement was $20.00 per car. i have all originals still. How dealership operates is mainly internet. So without images public generally would not know of any car in inventory. So without my images autos would not sell or would be sent back to auction after a period of time. I worked for them for about 3 months and was paid for work with other dealerships until my last one worked. the one I am refering to. Sorry if still vague.

...how did they get the images you haven't been paid for? Did you give them to them? Are they late paying their invoice? Do they normally prepay? When you asked them for payment, what did they say?


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MrClark7
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,562 posts
Likes: 543
Joined Dec 2011
     
Jul 12, 2014 23:39 |  #5

after each day shooting, procedure is uploading images into online server to process images into preset template for ad. I was told to keep track of images and at end, be paid. This dealer was to be invoiced by my company for my services. On this one, i was working for a employe that was on vacation. This was not the normal daily dealer I shot at. it was a favor by my company from two past indivduals that use to work together. but all that is irrelevant...

This was a year ago. I was always paid with bank deposite every two weeks. I had fall out with them about lack of work. Told to quit if not happy. Quit, then never paid last check for services.


Canon 1Dmark3, 6D, 17/40L, 24/70 L, 70/200 is f4, sigma 50 1.4
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MattPharmD
Senior Member
Avatar
255 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2011
     
Jul 12, 2014 23:47 |  #6

Going to guess that images were shot under "work-for-hire" conditions (not really sure, and I am sure someone will disagree).

However, it sounds like this would be more like contract or employment law instead of copyright law. There are lots of these kinds of lawyers and contacting your state bar would be a good way to fine one near you (assuming you are US based).


Photography is just a hobby for me.
Twitter: @PharmNerdMatt (external link)
Youtube:The PharmNerd (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MrClark7
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,562 posts
Likes: 543
Joined Dec 2011
     
Jul 13, 2014 00:01 |  #7

Well my approach now is my images were used in advertising. Its a little deeper than shooting a client and they miss use images not for profit. My images sold those vehicles. This isnt about one image. its about 1000 images used. it is clear they profited from the use of them.

On a side note, i contacted my ex boss tonight by text after i posted this, and let him know i seeking legal avenues. I explained those images are my property. His response was, Sorry, i did not know you were not paid. please tell me amount of autos in order to have you paid.


Canon 1Dmark3, 6D, 17/40L, 24/70 L, 70/200 is f4, sigma 50 1.4
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,601 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 156
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Jul 13, 2014 00:18 |  #8

MrClark7 wrote in post #17028086 (external link)
after each day shooting, procedure is uploading images into online server to process images into preset template for ad. I was told to keep track of images and at end, be paid. This dealer was to be invoiced by my company for my services. On this one, i was working for a employe that was on vacation. This was not the normal daily dealer I shot at. it was a favor by my company from two past indivduals that use to work together. but all that is irrelevant...

This was a year ago. I was always paid with bank deposite every two weeks. I had fall out with them about lack of work. Told to quit if not happy. Quit, then never paid last check for services.

...I'm not a lawyer, and I don't live where you live. But I don't think you need a specialist copyright lawyer. You firstly need to get your facts in order: and things that you consider to be "irrelevant" may well be more important than you think. The last shoot was outside the norm. Which could possibly mean who was supposed to pay the bill got a bit confused. And when you didn't follow up immediately after not getting paid things probably got forgotten. And now, a year later, they probably won't even remember who you are. Get together all the paperwork: emails, whatever paper trail you have that show the person who asked you to take the images, and where they agreed to compensate you. You haven't made things easy for yourself by waiting so long.

His response was, Sorry, i did not know you were not paid. please tell me amount of autos in order to have you paid.

Well obviously the first step when you haven't been paid is to ask to get paid. Over the last year, had you not done this?

Well my approach now is my images were used in advertising. Its a little deeper than shooting a client and they miss use images not for profit. My images sold those vehicles. This isnt about one image. its about 1000 images used. it is clear they profited from the use of them.

You had apparently agreed to a price to shoot these cars for a particular usage. They didn't pay the bill. Now that they are aware they have to pay a bill, they seem keen to pay the bill. Are you wanting to change the terms of usage now?


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MrClark7
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,562 posts
Likes: 543
Joined Dec 2011
     
Jul 13, 2014 00:27 |  #9

my wanting to change terms is that they were very aware of debt owed.

back to the original question....does anyone know of a lawyer specializing in copy right infringement. this posting isnt to do trail online over the issue, that what the lawyer is for. knowing or not knowing the fact of my case isnt the issue and im not on here for legal advise on the issue. The question is......lawyer.....If someone has sued over someone profiting from miss use of images who did you use.


Canon 1Dmark3, 6D, 17/40L, 24/70 L, 70/200 is f4, sigma 50 1.4
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotosGuy
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
75,941 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 2583
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Middle of Michigan
     
Jul 13, 2014 07:22 |  #10

What you want to search for is "Intellectual Property Lawyers" in your area.
Carolyn Wright & others on post #7 of: So this magazine stole my pics and used them in a feature


FrankC - 20D, RAW, Manual everything...
Classic Carz, Racing, Air Show, Flowers.
Find the light... A few Car Lighting Tips, and MOVE YOUR FEET!
Have you thought about making your own book? // Need an exposure crutch?
New Image Size Limits: Image must not exceed 1600 pixels on any side.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dan ­ Marchant
Do people actually believe in the Title Fairy?
Avatar
5,601 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2022
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Where I'm from is unimportant, it's where I'm going that counts.
     
Jul 13, 2014 12:12 |  #11

MrClark7 wrote in post #17028126 (external link)
back to the original question....does anyone know of a lawyer specializing in copy right infringement. this posting isnt to do trail online over the issue, that what the lawyer is for. knowing or not knowing the fact of my case isnt the issue and im not on here for legal advise on the issue. The question is......lawyer.....If someone has sued over someone profiting from miss use of images who did you use.

Except that it is important understand the details of your case so you get the right lawyer and sue for the right thing. As mentioned above your case is not copyright infringement. It is breach of contract, which is much cheaper and easier to take legal action for (this is good for you). Talk to a normal commercial lawyer, not a specialist IP lawyer.


Dan Marchant
Website/blog: danmarchant.com (external link)
Instagram: @dan_marchant (external link)
Gear Canon 5DIII + Fuji X-T2 + lenses + a plastic widget I found in the camera box.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MrClark7
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,562 posts
Likes: 543
Joined Dec 2011
     
Jul 13, 2014 14:04 |  #12

I see your point. is there a breach of contract without a contract? I understand there are instances when verbal is enough.


Canon 1Dmark3, 6D, 17/40L, 24/70 L, 70/200 is f4, sigma 50 1.4
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sspellman
Goldmember
Avatar
1,731 posts
Likes: 30
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Detroit, Michigan
     
Jul 13, 2014 15:02 |  #13

Your details are not very clear here, but I will try to simplify:
1) You worked for a company that provided a service to dealers to shoot cars for them
2) You worked for a few days for 1 dealer, and the photos were used to sell cars, you were not paid by your company for that job and quit.
3) You have no contract or invoice for this work.

To me this is not a copyright violation at all, simply a conflict over the last job with your former contracted employer. It sounds like they forgot/ignored to pay you or you didn't submit the right count/amount for them to pay you for the last job. The dealer should have no responsibility here since they assumed you were paid for your work.

I would recontact your old employer, clarify exactly how much you are owed in writing, and give them 30 days to pay. Do you have a contract or any other written agreement or even emails about compensation with your former employer? Or is this all verbal?


ScottSpellmanMedia.com [photography]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dan ­ Marchant
Do people actually believe in the Title Fairy?
Avatar
5,601 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2022
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Where I'm from is unimportant, it's where I'm going that counts.
     
Jul 14, 2014 22:29 |  #14

MrClark7 wrote in post #17029294 (external link)
I see your point. is there a breach of contract without a contract?

If there was no contract why did you shoot the photos and give them to the client. Answer, there was a contract.

If you did any of the negotiation by email a half decent lawyer will have no problem convincing a judge that a contract exists. Even if you didn't the fact that you have done similar work on previous occasions for pay will help to show that this was a paid gig and as such a contract exists which they breached.


Dan Marchant
Website/blog: danmarchant.com (external link)
Instagram: @dan_marchant (external link)
Gear Canon 5DIII + Fuji X-T2 + lenses + a plastic widget I found in the camera box.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
adam8080
Goldmember
Avatar
2,280 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
     
Jul 15, 2014 08:18 |  #15

Dan Marchant wrote in post #17032409 (external link)
If there was no contract why did you shoot the photos and give them to the client. Answer, there was a contract.

If you did any of the negotiation by email a half decent lawyer will have no problem convincing a judge that a contract exists. Even if you didn't the fact that you have done similar work on previous occasions for pay will help to show that this was a paid gig and as such a contract exists which they breached.


Yes. It sounds like you gave them photos willingly which at the very least grants them an implied license (at least in the USA), so you aren't able to turn around and sue them for infringement.


Housley Photography (external link)
Camera Obscura
Business Card Help!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,257 views & 0 likes for this thread
legal specialization?
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is potatopicker21
666 guests, 288 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.