Should I allow people to use my photos for free to gain exposure? MUST READ!!

What are you talking about? You might want to elaborate more... Plus actually put the photo itself in the thread not the link ;)

So my question is who would be gaining exposure?
 
RebeccaAPhotography said:
What are you talking about? You might want to elaborate more... Plus actually put the photo itself in the thread not the link ;)

So my question is who would be gaining exposure?

Edit..... I'm reading what you wrote under the photo.
 
RebeccaAPhotography said:
What are you talking about? You might want to elaborate more... Plus actually put the photo itself in the thread not the link ;)

So my question is who would be gaining exposure?

Edit..... I'm reading what you wrote under the photo.
Hi Rebecca,,
Not my photo or comments. That is why I just posted a link. I don't know the person who wrote this, but, wow, is this ever the truth.
 
... but, wow, is this ever the truth.

Not sure what you're asking here. That the photo equipment cost the guy some money? Yes, I believe it's true. Is the image worth what he says it is? I don't know but if that's the value he puts on it then so be it.
 
Absolute rot. The only way he can say that image cost $6700 is if he only took that single picture and immediately destroyed all of the equipment. Other than costs associtated with that day, the cost of the equipment is amortized over it's life and divided by the number of images taken. I agree completely with the sentiment, but saying that it cost him that much money to take the picture removes all credibility from an otherwise reasonable statement.
 
Absolute rot. The only way he can say that image cost $6700 is if he only took that single picture and immediately destroyed all of the equipment. Other than costs associtated with that day, the cost of the equipment is amortized over it's life and divided by the number of images taken. I agree completely with the sentiment, but saying that it cost him that much money to take the picture removes all credibility from an otherwise reasonable statement.

If you read his comments, he agrees that the photo didn't actually cost that much to produce. That's just how much he's going to send you the bill for if you use it without his consent. I can't say that that's completely unreasonable.
 
I saw that a while back and while it is interesting to read

Money wise - An image is only worth what someone is willing to pay - This could be said for a lot of things.
 
LOL. Don't get so serious all, I just thought it was a great rant by someone who is tired of people asking him for free photos in exchange for "credit". The details of cost etc. are really irrelevant.
Considering that I have been only too eager to license photos to others for credit, I hear what he is saying only too clearly.
 
or how much my lawyer will send you a bill for if it's found being used without my permission.
Oops! Time to find a better lawyer, because sending a bill could be a very expensive mistake.
 
The article is a good read, but a gross exaggeration also... The comments that follow are good ones as well.
Pixels aren't free, but like one comment said... he'd have to throw all of that gear into the drink when he was done in order for THAT image to cost that much.
 
The article is a good read, but a gross exaggeration also... The comments that follow are good ones as well.
Pixels aren't free, but like one comment said... he'd have to throw all of that gear into the drink when he was done in order for THAT image to cost that much.
Actually, I think he'd have to jump into the drink with allof his equipment for the price to get anywhere near that, lol
EDIT: But I still like his message, exagerated as it may be.
 
Last edited:
or how much my lawyer will send you a bill for if it's found being used without my permission.
Oops! Time to find a better lawyer, because sending a bill could be a very expensive mistake.
Really?
Absolutely.

1. How do you or your attorney know they only used the stolen photo that one time? What if they also had 300,000 brochures printed up with the photo in them, or used the photo in a number of other types of media?

2. By sending a bill the attorney just pretty much locked down the amount of actual damages the copyright owner could seek in court.

There is no limit to the amount of actual damages that can be awarded. But, actual damages have to be proven. Statutory damamges don't.

So, statutory damages. If the copyright owner's attorney can prove the infringement was willful, the court is allowed the discretion of awarding up to $150,000 per infringed image, plus all court costs and attorney fees. (See USC 17 §504 · Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits - http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.pdf)

Help! I’ve Been Infringed! | Photo Attorney

 
Oops! Time to find a better lawyer, because sending a bill could be a very expensive mistake.
Really?
Absolutely.

1. How do you or your attorney know they only used the stolen photo that one time? What if they also had 300,000 brochures printed up with the photo in them, or used the photo in a number of other types of media?

2. By sending a bill the attorney just pretty much locked down the amount of actual damages the copyright owner could seek in court.

There is no limit to the amount of actual damages that can be awarded. But, actual damages have to be proven. Statutory damamges don't.

So, statutory damages. If the copyright owner's attorney can prove the infringement was willful, the court is allowed the discretion of awarding up to $150,000 per infringed image, plus all court costs and attorney fees. (See USC 17 §504 · Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits - http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.pdf)

Help! I’ve Been Infringed! | Photo Attorney
Thanks KmH,
Very well explained.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top