Oooookaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyy.....what gives?

[480sparky]

National Geographic Photo contest.

Direct from their rules:

WHO MAY ENTER
Contest is open only to individuals who have reached the age of majority in their jurisdiction of residence at the time of entry and who do NOT reside in Cuba, Iran, New Jersey, North Korea, the Province of Quebec, Sudan, Syria or Vermont.

Seriously? Quebec, Vermont and New Jersey are out?

Whazzup with THAT?

 

[Designer]

Probably their local rules regarding contests.

 

[480sparky]

Who's rules? The states / Province?

 

[Derrel]

NG probably does not wish to do business with communist or "terrorist" governments...and some regional government units (US states, or Canadian provinces) have longstanding laws or regulations regarding contests; my guess is that Quebec, New Jersey, and Vermont consider these types of "contests" to be a form of unauthorized, and thus prohibited, form of gambling. Yeah...old-fashioned but....whatcha' gonna do???

 

[480sparky]

If it's considered gambling, then explain Atlantic City.

 

[Derrel]

Are you serious???? Have you not heard of contest prohibitions??? MANY jurisdictions have prohibitions against contests; this can be considered a "lottery" according to many statutes. Some contests charge admissions fees, and have horrible payouts. Yaddda, yadda, yadda. Many contests have HUGE fine print segments, in which entrants forfeit rights, establish the entrants as "business partners" or as "those doing business with" the parties involved, and thus susceptible to phone calls,advertising, and e-mail spamming for up to 18 months as a result of the "relationship" the contest creates, etc.

Prohibitions against sweepstakes and contests have been regulated in some jurisdictions for literally decades, as a form of gambling. And in New Jersey...well...NG wouldn't wanna' step on the toes of the people that run that state's non-native-American gambling establishments, would they????

 

[JG_Coleman]

I remember a similar peculiar rule for a contest hosted by Outdoor Photographer magazine earlier this year. I think it was the "American Landscape" contest. I was pretty disappointed to find that the rules specified that the contest was...

open to legal residents of the 50 United States and District of Columbia (excluding residents of Colorado, Connecticut, Vermont, and Maryland)

This left me wondering why in the world these states were excluded. In this case, though, somebody posted a complaint about the restriction to Outdoor Photographer's Facebook page. The magazine's official response:

...legal US residents of CO, CT, MD and VT can't even enter this contest because laws forbid them from entering a "skill-based contest where there is an entry fee"...

So, that was the magazine's explanation, for what it's worth. Still rather peculiar, though, since I find it VERY hard to believe that there aren't all sorts of skills-based contests that go on in these states every year which demand an entry fee. I suppose it may be one of these laws that are rarely enforced except in extreme cases, but which lawyers advise larger corporations to heed such that they cover their ass against potential legal problems.

 

[480sparky]

Are you serious???? Have you not heard of contest prohibitions??? ......

I'm serious............ because I don't enter them.

 

[thetrue]

NatGeo is mostly a rights grab anyway, maybe Those states and provinces are protecting the copyright owners.....?

 

[tirediron]

NatGeo is mostly a rights grab anyway, maybe Those states and provinces are protecting the copyright owners.....?

The bench-mark standard in outdoor, nature & travel photography is a rights grab? I'm having a little trouble with that.

 

[unpopular]

^^ yeah? and Salvation Army is 100% honest, too.

strange things happen.

 

[thetrue]

Directly from those same rules that sparky quoted:
LICENSE


By entering the Contest, all entrants grant an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide non-exclusive license to Authorized Parties, to reproduce, distribute, display and create derivative works of the entries (along with a name credit) in connection with the Contest and promotion of the Contest, in any media now or hereafter known, including, but not limited to: Display at a potential exhibition of winners; publication of a book featuring select entries in the Contest; publication in National Geographic magazine or online highlighting entries or winners of the Contest. Entrants consent to the Sponsor doing or omitting to do any act that would otherwise infringe the entrant’s “moral rights” in their entries. Display or publication of any entry on an Authorized Party’s website does not indicate the entrant will be selected as a winner. Authorized Parties will not be required to pay any additional consideration or seek any additional approval in connection with such use. Additionally, by entering, each entrant grants to Authorized Parties the unrestricted right to use all statements made in connection with the Contest, and pictures or likenesses of Contest entrants, or choose not to do so, at their sole discretion. Authorized Parties will not be required to pay any additional consideration or seek any additional approval in connection with such use.


Kind of rights grabby, except YOU pay THEM to do whatever they want with it.

 

[Derrel]

NatGeo is mostly a rights grab anyway, maybe Those states and provinces are protecting the copyright owners.....?

The bench-mark standard in outdoor, nature & travel photography is a rights grab? I'm having a little trouble with that.

Not just a rights grab....more like a "total rights" grab.

 

[480sparky]

So people in NJ and Vermont don't have any rights to grab?

 

[rexbobcat]

So people in NJ and Vermont don't have any rights to grab?

No.

They're all tools.