Question about giving "exclusive rights" when entering photo contest

Hi,

I want to start entering some photo contests to get some visibility for my work. My friend wanted me to enter the AAA / Westways Photo Contest 2014, but the terms seem really extreme to me:

https://www.omnicontes​ts4.com …ads/WestwaysRul​es2014.pdf

Under #3. Entry) It says "Submission of an entry... grants Auto Club, and third parties authorized by Sponsor, the exclusive, perpetual right to publish... [Blah blah blah--essentially do whatever they want]."

I am worried about their use of the word "exclusive."

Does it mean I basically give them the photograph and I can't sell it or give it to anyone else anymore myself?

And if that's true, is this typical of all major photo contests?

Seems extremely extreme to me. Is it a good tradeoff for visibility?

Thanks for your help.

This is why I won't enter any of these type of contests. Do you really want to grant them exclusive and perpetual rights to your photo to publish as they choose at will, forever? No thanks!

Do you really think entering contests will give you more exposure? I really doubt that.

It doesn't give you any exposure if you don't win. All it does is give the contest sponsor free photos. Someone with more legal knowledge will have to fill in the fine details, but at minimum you would never be able to sell that photo to anyone or allow anyone else to use it commercially.

Aren't most contests just a cheap photo grab by the organiser?

The vast majority of photo contests are a truly disgraceful scam. In addition to giving up your rights to your photography, you pay a fee. In other words, you work for the contest owners and you pay them to do so.

http://artists-bill-of-rights.org …ion-lists/rights-on-list/

While it is typical contest language, it seems very unlikely that they would ever try to enforce exclusivity. The better question is - what are better marketing projects?

Visibility for your work? Ha Ha Ha !

Entering contests? simple answer: Don't

It has been at least three decades since there was a genuine photography contest which awarded skill, technique and creativity...the majority are and have always been a waste of time...from the camera club contest which rewards your ability to photograph in 1890's salon style...to the blatant rights grabs of major companies who can well afford to pay proper money for photography.

And the most despicable of all: competitions run by microstock companies...who want to rights grab amateur crap...because they have basically lost the plot and cannot sell from the libraries the already administer and/or do not want to give out their overly generous 30% - 50% commissions

PS I love being controversial.

photog49 wrote in post #16923520
Visibility for your work? Ha Ha Ha !

Entering contests? simple answer: Don't

It has been at least three decades since there was a genuine photography contest which awarded skill, technique and creativity...the majority are and have always been a waste of time...from the camera club contest which rewards your ability to photograph in 1890's salon style...to the blatant rights grabs of major companies who can well afford to pay proper money for photography.

Last real exhibition I entered was in 1983. It was a prestigious event and even though I placed well it generated zero monetary interest.

Regards,
GEWB

Dan Marchant wrote in post #16922280
http://artists-bill-of-rights.org …ion-lists/rights-on-list/

Thanks this is really useful!

i use a website called viewbug. under the contests, they all say that the photographer remains the owner of all copyrights. plus its free, or you can pay for better contests.

its a bit of fun

like others, i wouldn't trust a contest that says that they have exclusive rights to a photograph for a contest.

It matters not that the entrant to the competetion still owns the copyright, if the licence terms are restrictive enough. A perpetual non revokable all media EXCLUSIVE sub licensable licence is pretty much as good owning the copyright. They can do what they like with the image, and all you can do is look at it. The terms if fully enforced could probably stop you even posting the image on your own website.

Alan

For me, it depends on the host. If it's a non-profit and I support their cause, I don't mind granting them rights unless they want the whole copyright kit and kaboodle. Then I'll think twice. I entered a Renaissance Faire contest a couple of times, where they claim the use of the images. I've seen my stuff a few times in promotional materials. It doesn't bother me because it was for fun and I don't lose any revenue that I sought or expected. One of the reasons that I've resisted "going pro" is that I don't want photography to stop being fun. If I had to make a living at it, I think it would take all the fun out of it.

How does "exclusive rights" rights work if say I submit a photo 20mm focal length wide, but also have the same shot but wider say at 16mm focal length wide? Will I still be able to use the 16mm one for commercial use?