Singer used my photo for her business card....

[tirediron]

... I've been supporting for years. She's a phenomenal singer and I've been letting her use my images for years for promotion on social media.

I would say that she can make a strong case for implied consent. IMO, this particular ship has sailed, and anything you try and do retroactively may very well have a negative effect. My approach would be to simply say, "Hey, cool - great looking card!" and then lead into a discussion of future use. If this young lady is, or may go placs, you need paperwork, and you need it quickly.

 

[DGMPhotography]

If she asked you, how would you respond? If you would have given her permission, it's probably best just to express your feelings. Just let her know what your expectations are in this case, that you need her to run by usage with you first - and then forgive and forget. Because you'd be ok with this anyway, it's kind of a "no biggie" situation.

If you'd charge her for this usage but want/need to maintain a relationship, make that known - and give her a discount. Again, remind her that the images are your and that you need to discuss terms with her.

If you recovering your license is more important than keeping her as a client, then demand full payment. Start softly and end with an attorney.

Just remember, everything you do has consequences. It doesn't matter if you're in your legal right here or not. You have to think about the PR, too.

No, totally. The relationship here is more important than compensation. We're good friends, and she may be my ticket to the big leagues... but using my photo without permission still isn't okay. I'm just trying to figure out what the right words would be for this delicate situation... I want to let her know, but in a way that doesn't make her not want to use my photos again, for fear it would upset me or something.

Well I'm probably in the minority here but I'd say this would be a good time to let sleeping dogs lie.

Anything said about the business card photo is likely to be taken the wrong way. Look at her message to you, she's wishing you a happy birthday and showing off the card thinking you'll be thrilled.

So you have to decide what's more important here, the business aspect or the friendship, and it sounds like to me you've already made that choice.

So yes, you have every right to object and clarify and etc etc, but I don't think you'll end up getting a result you want if you go there.

My 2 cents worth.

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk

I thought about doing that as well.. Just forget about it. But then I feel like I'd be establishing even more precedent, which isn't what I want.

I'd at least let her know.

something along the lines of : Yo, im a pro too. Next time let me know first--I have no problems with you using it--but for stuff like this It's MY picture. I hold the rights to usage.

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking... the wordsmithing is the crucial part here.

 

[unpopular]

I would say that she can make a strong case for implied consent.

Is there legal precedent for this? I can kind of see it going both ways.

As far as "this boat has sailed" I think that there is problems with that. If the boat has sailed, then it has sailed for the image - not for the business card. If you let this slide without comment, it could only potentially get worse for the OP. What if she uses it to promote specific concerts for which she's being reimbursed? What about album art?

It seems like it was "no big deal" when the image was being used to promote herself while nobody was listening (let's face it, social media marketing is a joke). However, now she's using it to actively seek work.

If she starts using the image to promote gigs she already has landed, that could mean the image has really run out from under him, and if there is implied consent, then it would certainly be harder to resolve later.

If OP can deal with the ship being sailed, then the ship has sailed completely - and it's time to step up her promo package ASAP - and with it, a clear license.

This is why I do everything for hire. Copyright management royalties is too much of a headache.

 

[DGMPhotography]

... I've been supporting for years. She's a phenomenal singer and I've been letting her use my images for years for promotion on social media.

I would say that she can make a strong case for implied consent. IMO, this particular ship has sailed, and anything you try and do retroactively may very well have a negative effect. My approach would be to simply say, "Hey, cool - great looking card!" and then lead into a discussion of future use. If this young lady is, or may go placs, you need paperwork, and you need it quickly.

Well our actual agreement to date would be that she credits me. Either with my watermark, or verbally (on social media), and the card has neither.

 

[Braineack]

extra points for use of "yo" and "bro"

 

[unpopular]

Well our actual agreement to date would be that she credits me. Either with my watermark, or verbally (on social media), and the card has neither.

Well, that's a GREAT place to start the conversation! Just make it clear to her that if she wants to use the image in the future without credit, she needs to talk to you first. If she wonders why, flatter her with the idea of solo albums and that picture on it, and how you'd need to be reimbursed for such a thing. But make sure she knows, 100%, that this instance wasn't a big deal and you'd be ok with it anyway.

Honestly though, I doubt you'll have to go into those hypotheticals.

 

[waday]

... I've been supporting for years. She's a phenomenal singer and I've been letting her use my images for years for promotion on social media.

I would say that she can make a strong case for implied consent. IMO, this particular ship has sailed, and anything you try and do retroactively may very well have a negative effect. My approach would be to simply say, "Hey, cool - great looking card!" and then lead into a discussion of future use. If this young lady is, or may go placs, you need paperwork, and you need it quickly.

Well our actual agreement to date would be that she credits me. Either with my watermark, or verbally (on social media), and the card has neither.

Sorry to be blunt, but if you want to completely destroy your relationship with her, I'd say go this route.

 

[unpopular]

You think? Honestly, I think she'd understand, it's what she agreed to. So long as it's absolutely clear that she knows he's not angry about it, it doesn't really sound like he is.

The trick when dealing with these sort of things is to remember that people genuinely feel that their portrayal is "theirs", and I think there is a valid emotion to that, and in other places the law does protect it.

It's the photographer's job to respect sense of ownership of self, while also protecting what is rightfully theirs. This is the difference between a photographer I'd hire and one who belongs to the PPA.

 

[astroNikon]

As Derrel brought up about more PR stuff ... You may want to use it as a springboard to get her on a contract for you to do more PR shots for her to get her social media stuff up to 'snuff and your name will get out there more as watermarked images.

 

[tirediron]

I would say that she can make a strong case for implied consent.

Is there legal precedent for this? I can kind of see it going both ways..

There certainly is in Canada, I assume that something similar exists in the US, but perhaps not. In essence "implied consent" is an act or action which someone has allowed to happen for an extended period of time without saying or doing anything to indicate that they find it unacceptable or inappropriate. Now that the OP has told us that there was an agreement in place, that does change things somewhat.

 

[runnah]

It's the photographer's job to respect sense of ownership of self, while also protecting what is rightfully theirs. This is the difference between a photographer I'd hire and one who belongs to the PPA.

But it's a good businessman's job to know when to give the potential large customer a break on a small purchase so they come back for more. You nickel and dime someone for everything they find someone else.

 

[waday]

Well our actual agreement to date would be that she credits me. Either with my watermark, or verbally (on social media), and the card has neither.

Just a thought, did she post this publicly on your profile, or via a private message? If publicly, she technically provided you credit via social media.

 

[DGMPhotography]

Well our actual agreement to date would be that she credits me. Either with my watermark, or verbally (on social media), and the card has neither.

Just a thought, did she post this publicly on your profile, or via a private message? If publicly, she technically provided you credit via social media.

This was on my profile.. and yes, but not on the card itself, where she will be handing them out in person. Unless she plans to vocally tell them Daryll Morgan took the picture every time she hands out a card.

 

[waday]

Well our actual agreement to date would be that she credits me. Either with my watermark, or verbally (on social media), and the card has neither.

Just a thought, did she post this publicly on your profile, or via a private message? If publicly, she technically provided you credit via social media.

This was on my profile.. and yes, but not on the card itself, where she will be handing them out in person. Unless she plans to vocally tell them Daryll Morgan took the picture every time she hands out a card.

Than there is a problem with your agreement. Because, she posted a photo of your business card crediting the photo to you. If you don't think that's credit, and decide to take it a step further, than it'll be your word against her's based on whether or not she verbally told someone that you took the photo. This can get very hairy very fast.

The best advice so far:

But it's a good businessman's job to know when to give the potential large customer a break on a small purchase so they come back for more. You nickel and dime someone for everything they find someone else.

 

[DGMPhotography]

Well our actual agreement to date would be that she credits me. Either with my watermark, or verbally (on social media), and the card has neither.

Just a thought, did she post this publicly on your profile, or via a private message? If publicly, she technically provided you credit via social media.

This was on my profile.. and yes, but not on the card itself, where she will be handing them out in person. Unless she plans to vocally tell them Daryll Morgan took the picture every time she hands out a card.

Than there is a problem with your agreement. Because, she posted a photo of your business card crediting the photo to you. If you don't think that's credit, and decide to take it a step further, than it'll be your word against her's based on whether or not she verbally told someone that you took the photo. This can get very hairy very fast.

The best advice so far:

But it's a good businessman's job to know when to give the potential large customer a break on a small purchase so they come back for more. You nickel and dime someone for everything they find someone else.

I think you're looking at this from the wrong perspective. But I appreciate your feedback.