Photography Life Lesson from an opportunist

[osumisan]

I shoot my daughter's high school sports on a regular basis and post the galleries (in medium size) for the parents. It's cool to see girls post of Facebook and such. These have always been good circle of friends over the years so I never had any problems and there was an implied eitquette on using my photos. My biggest mistake was mentioning in the email that sent the galleries that they may download anything they like for personal use. Now I have to change my habits due to my loose copyright and limited control: a new team club owner, and oportunist, has used my action photos in his advertising without ever asking me first. I have now seen my photos in the local high school team program (advertising the pre-mentioned coaches' club team try-outs), website action shots, and in a full-color post card that was mailed out to several hundred families.

I chalk this faux paus up to my being too nice in the beginning and not setting the proper tone for my photos use (which I now guard). There doesn't seem to be any sense in action on my part now aside from changing my professional habits. How would you have handled this situation?

 

[pixmedic]

a club owner using them for advertising may or may not be considered "personal" use. If you really want to push it, send them a notice saying that you own the copyrights to those photos and did not give them permission to use them in ANY commercial manner. for next time, definitely be specific in the release forms what can and can not be done with them.

 

[unpopular]

No. I think you're in the right to permit personal use. I think though the problem is not defining clearly what "personal use" means. OTOH, and legally it doesn't matter, but may matter for you - are these images being used commercially or in the publication of non-profit? If he did ask permission, would you have granted it? If so, the issue is moot and is more about your ego, though if you were to charge him - that's another matter and money out of your pocket.

I agree, however, that you ought to be more careful. Perhaps stating that only specific people, such as families and team mates of the subject, but not coaches, teachers or any other individual may use the images for personal use, and may not under any circumstance be reproduced in any form of advertisement, brochure or other publication or promotional material.

It's good to have some flexibility, but the devil is in the details.

 

[KmH]

There is no usage type that is legally known as personal. There is editorial use, or commercial use.
Advertising would be a commercial use.

Copyright ownership begins the instant the image file is written to the memory card in the camera. US copyright law is federal law. (United States Code Title 17, or USC 17 - U.S. Copyright Office - Copyright Law of the United States)

Effective enforcement of your copyrights can only be accomplished by publically registering your copyrights with the US Copyright Office. U.S. Copyright Office - Registering a Work (FAQ)

Copyrights can be registered online - https://eco.copyright.gov/eService_enu/start.swe?SWECmd=Start&SWEHo=eco.copyright.gov

or by regular mail.

Step-by-step - Registering Your Copyrights Using the eCO System

More info - Registering Your Library of Photographs | Photo Attorney
What’s An Infringement Worth? | Photo Attorney
How to Provide a Photo License to a Friend | Photo Attorney\

Watch this -
Blogger Asserts Copyright, Newspaper Editor Gets Irate - YouTube

 

[unpopular]

^^ this minus registration, which I think is an unnecessary expense in most cases. Unless teh CO has a bulk option the way the library of congress does for ISBNs, it adds $45 per IMAGE, most of which will never be stolen, or if they are they will be stolen by individuals - suing individuals for the maximum punitive damages is a BAD idea and is a sure way to loose respect in your community.

Just because you can't sue for punitive damages does not mean that your copyright is not protected. You can still sue for an injunction, which in most cases is all you'd really want to do anyway. Also, actual damages aren't that difficult to prove if you operate on a flat rate, 'royalty-free' license.

Personally, I don't think the expense involved with copyright enforcement is worth the benefit. My work is graphic design and advertising, so it's a little different of an arrangement, but I do think 'for hire' is a better route, especially today as this is product which the market demands. Let copyright be the client's problem.

 

[KmH]

it adds $45 per IMAGE,

Registration only costs $45 per image, if you only register 1 image at a time.

Online registration allows us to register hundreds of images for the $45 registration fee.

By mail, up to 750 images can be registered per registration application form.

Steps to Prepare Your Images for Copyright Registration Using Photoshop® | Photo Attorney

 

[unpopular]

I figured that there must have been some kind of bulk option. Might want to look into this for some (but not all) of my images...

still. there is expense involved with copyright enforcement, both in terms of monetary and publicity, and what you may have a legal right to does not always equate to what people believe is moral. The bottom line is, if you make a regular habit of threatening grandmas with inkjet printers, you're not going to last long as a portrait photographer - this regardless if grandma is a lousy thief or not.

 

[txtowman]

I would politely ask them to stop using the photos or make a nice donation to the organization in my name.

I would stop allowing free use, and have a small subscription fee for access.

 

[KmH]

I figured that there must have been some kind of bulk option. Might want to look into this for some (but not all) of my images...

still. there is expense involved with copyright enforcement, both in terms of monetary and publicity, and what you may have a legal right to does not always equate to what people believe is moral. The bottom line is, if you make a regular habit of threatening grandmas with inkjet printers, you're not going to last long as a portrait photographer - this regardless if grandma is a lousy thief or not.

No one but you can make decisions about protecting your copyrights.

If you don't mind grandma stealing your car or your wallet, then no doubt, don't worry about grandma stealing your photographs either.

One of the nice things copyright registration provides is it allows an attorney to choose between seeking statutory or actual damages. Actual damages have to be proven. Statutory damages don't.
If it can be shown an infringement was willful, the infringer can be required to pay all of your court cost and attorney fees, plus statutory damage awards of up to $150,000 per infringed image.

As far as publicity, how many copyright infringement actions have you heard about lately?

Spend some time following the case law.