Adorama backs down from "rights grab"

philwillmedia wrote in post #10357651
Now, let's all move along.
Nothing to see here.

Actually, Phil, there's not only quite a bit to see here but quite a bit to learn. At least for those who wish to.

We're discussing semantics and forgetting the root (OP) of the thread which is this: Adorama rolled out a contest that contained "rights-grab" language. A well-known, and very widely-read attorney blogged about it, and upon becoming aware of their oversight, Adorama responded by correcting that error.

Good for adorama! But an even larger pat on the back for us!

The point being that discussions such as this serve a purpose. A very important purpose. This is not the first rights grab / photo contest thread on POTN and unfortunately, will probably not be the last.

But when they occur, if they are actively discussed, you-tubed, and blogged about, if people email, mail, and/or call companies engaged in this behavior, perhaps companies will begin to understand that it is just not worth the negative public relations to acquire a nice image or two.

And perhaps they will stop.

Helen herself indirectly identified the problem when she wrote "...one could imagine they simply cut and paste from the terms and conditions they’d provided for another competition organizer."

I'll agree with that. It probably did happen that way. But why? The reason is that it has become so widely-accepted. It's become insidiously pervasive.

Well, it's got to stop. And the only way it will is with threads and blogs and public outcry. So you see, there's much to see. And there's much work to do, too.

Just to be clear, some of the words quoted above were posted in this thread solely by myself. In each case I was debating previous posters about the ethics involved with wording in contests and legal "click here" statements,. but none were being applied directly at Adorama.
My first post bringing up the "flimflam" and "con" nature of legalese was directed at "legalese" not at Adorama,.
thus it ended with,

As CannedHeat says, the larger topic is a good one on a photography forum. Sorry if the discussion at large seemed to imply it was all being directed at one vendor,. but there continues to be valid discussion on the larger subject.

My understanding it was such an internet discussion/post that brought all this to Adorama's attention thus impacting the decision to alter the language.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #10359616
My understanding it was such an internet discussion/post that brought all this to Adorama's attention thus impacting the decision to alter the language.

Exactly. And that brings up a point that may very well be the most important point and one that has not been discussed here.

If one spends just a little time in thought and analysis, there is much to be "seen" here beneath the surface.

In my post I surmised that Adorama contracted a consulting firm to design the contest. Helen verified that. But the wording in Helen's post is important when she wrote "Designing and setting up of the competition was outsourced to a specialist company..." A "specialist" company.

When things started going downhill for Adorama, it's probably safe to assume a key cog at adorama contacted this firm. It's probably also safe to assume that the conversation ranged anywhere from a nice, polite chit-chat to a reaming of a new (consultants) hole.

This is important. That consulting company, which will probably go on to provide the same service for others, is now on notice that what they do is being watched and that the contests they design can cause public relations problems for their clients. They're smart business people. They know if they garner a reputation that they cause PR problems for their clients, they will have no clients. This may cause them to be more cuatious. For adorama, it was a single event. For the consultants, it may have a ripple effect that continues into the future.

So the internet discussions and posts accomplished something, and none of it would have happened if everybody had just put on their blinders and "...moved along."

As a general question, what prize would be sufficient to get you to enter a photo contest where you had to sign over all of your rights to that photo?

Is the "rights grab'' thing an issue only because the potential prize is not of sufficient value to justify it?

CannedHeat wrote in post #10360399
This is important. That consulting company, which will probably go on to provide the same service for others, is now on notice that what they do is being watched and that the contests they design can cause public relations problems for their clients. They're smart business people. They know if they garner a reputation that they cause PR problems for their clients, they will have no clients. This may cause them to be more cuatious. For adorama, it was a single event. For the consultants, it may have a ripple effect that continues into the future.

I'm a little more suspicious. My cynicism works like this... the lawyers who wrote it thought, "Hey, we can grab the rights too, and most people will never complain, and we save ourselves copyright hassles later on if we think it's worth something.". Then, the businesses are easy to convince of the same thing.

Adorama was remiss in not checking the consultant's work, but corrected their mistake as they do have other considerations to be aware of that a non-photo business wouldn't have.

The consultant, meanwhile, thinks, "Damn, we got caught on this one, but the next 50 will slide through just fine. No need to change anything.".

CannedHeat wrote in post #10360399
So the internet discussions and posts accomplished something, and none of it would have happened if everybody had just put on their blinders and "...moved along."

Which is exactly why I appreciated your thread so much. Yes, people should read what they agree to, but it's a great service to shine the light of day on stuff like this as well.

heycow wrote in post #10328480
Can't protect people from themselves. Who will help them buy a house, a car, get a job, etc?

i agree with most folks here

if people are lazy or dumb not to read the rules to bad.

rules are there, if you don't like them don't participate.

photoguy6405 wrote in post #10360875
Which is exactly why I appreciated your thread so much.

While I appreciate that, it's not my thread. It's the photographic community's thread. And It's not just potn and those who participated here. It's probably being discussed in many forums and blogs elsewhere. We'll probably never know to what extent the cloudisphere is abuzz.

For once the little guy won one. A corporate giant heard the collective voice of union and responded. It's the power of the internet.

It's also a testimony to Adorama and their responsible standing within our community. Helen has always been a straight egg in these forums - speaking her mind but also taking hits. I have no reason to believe it is other than what she said - a consultancy that designed an objectionable contest and an error on adorama's part in that they did not review the consultancy's work.

Let's consider at least giving adorama the benefit of the doubt.