I was in the little town of Montezuma, Indiana yesterday, and managed a few photos. A couple of which are posted to the site. I decided to get a little history of the town to add to the descriptions, and found on of my photos from 2016 on the city's web site! It is used without my permission, without any credit. And certainly without any compensation! This is a montezuma.in.gov address, presumably the municipal government.
Here's what I came across: Montezuma It looks like it is posted a couple of places on the site.
This photo wasn't posted here, but was posted to my blog: Montezuma
Most disappointing, and I did add a comment to the web page expressing my dissatisfaction. We'll see what, if anything happens.
The most disappointing this is that I'd've been honored to let them use the image if they had asked, and given credit. I'm not a professional, and they're not a commercial organization.
Anybody else have this kind of experience? It has taken the shine off my Sunday...
Any suggestions on how to proceed?
Aside: After all this, I did check google's image search, and tin-eye, bit found this.
You know, I might think about calling them up just to ask for the credit on the image(s) that are yours. They were probably just trying to do things on the cheap.
That is sad but I've heard of it happening before. Other members on here have complained about this in the past. I don't know what they did about it.
On the other side, there have been some pictures posted here that were taken by someone else but the 365 member took credit for it and didn't give credit to the person who took it.
Sorry to hear this has happened to you. I bet that you are furious. What can others do to protect their work? I hope that you hear back from them and you are properly compensated, and given the earned recognition for your work. Very interested to hear this pans out for you.
@lsquared I'm pretty sure this goes on all the time. It's interesting that they found it. I checked google and came up with their site but not any reference to yours. I did not search for very long though. this happened to a friend of mine. she didn't pursue it. I guess that the internet just opens us up to this kind of thing. hers was watermarked too. they just cropped away the watermark. wait and see if you hear from them. they may be more than gracious and fix it. or they may take it down. somehow I am doubting compensation but maybe a photo cred. be flattered, know that you are showing something to others who might not otherwise see it! I'm sorry you had to be upset by something like this. we all really love your photos! you've shown me places I will likely never go!
This is a problem and I think you're right to address them. I'd also want to know how they found your image and where they took it from. Another point, and I don't know if it really helps, may be the size of the image posted. Please keep us informed as you go through this.
I do hope you get a response, at least to credit you on the photograph. I had a similar experience here and again it was a local government site. Conversely, I was asked if my image could be used and I agreed provided I was credited in it. They used the image but didn't credit it. Next minute, I found it was being used as their cover photo on Facebook as well, also uncredited.
I guess at the end of the day, people think anything on the internet is available for public use and it isn't considered theft because it is up there already. The rise of the meme just adds to that - reposted everywhere, copied and forwarded thousands of times without a thought.
I love your photographs. On here, I tend to change the privacy settings after a few days as a number of mine were showing up on pinterest and instagram, taken and published as if someone else's and I just didn't like it.
Do let us know what happens. I think a challenge is right. To my mind, it is just good manners to ask your permission first, even if there is no financials involved.
Lots of great comments and thoughts here, thanks all!
No response from Montezuma yet, but that's not really surprising. We're talking about a town of under 1,000 people, probably a part time "web master".
I'm willing to chalk it up to ignorance, not malice. Especially if they respond (in an appropriate manner).
That said, the casual way that people seem to treat IP (Intellectual property) is pretty frustrating. From using photos to downloading music to any number of other examples. And if it were to turn out that somebody else copied it and got paid... well, that would change everything.
That stinks! I have our local government use many of mine, but it's always been with my permission - Can't imagine just spotting one of mine somewhere (other than our local newspaper - editor and I are friends and I told her she was free to use any I posted on FB with my name). On the positive side, I'm glad I found your site - do like your b&w photography very much.
Shame on them! I know that IP is a often over looked issue but still extremely important. I am hoping that they do the right thing and at least give you credit.
I wanted to add this, why not tell the city that they should give you credit for the image and also make a donation to a charity of their choice.for the use of the image.
Stripped down the bare facts this is theft of intellenctual property, not to mention violation of copyright. I'd be taking this further if you have time and energy.
Yes I have had a similar experience .. Took a night shot of our local town which I was pretty chuffed about .. posted it on the Local page .. The local hotel whom were in the shot asked if they could use my photo with my credit for some promo stuff .. not a problem .. Then I got told by a friend that my photo was another FB page that was used for grumps and grizzles of local shops etc. I did not want to be associated with that page and asked them to take it down... which they did but they could not see what was wrong and could not see that they just needed to ask...
Quick update: No response to my emails, no action as far as removing my photo or adding credit.
I guess it's not all that surprising, but is disappointing.
I suppose I'll reach out again next week, after they've had a full week. I wonder if I could find a cease-and-desist letter template on the web. Looks like their town council meetings are the third Thursday of each month ...
@lsquared who did you email? if it was a general email, can you dig up the name of someone in a position of authority and follow up with them? because honestly, how difficult is it to apologize profusely and remove it, or ask if you'd be willing to leave it up giving you credit as photog?
that said, it's been not even a week... given "bureaucracy" (in a town of 1000???) perhaps your note is going back and forth between folks trying to figure out what they need to do now... or you know, perhaps the person tasked with checking the general email box is off sick...
@northy I started by adding a comment to the photo, which seems to have gone to moderation (as I would hope). I followed up at the sites "contact" page. It wouldn't surprise me if they don't check the web site real frequently.
And really, I only want an apology, and either credit or take down the photo. It's the principle, not the dollars (for me, at least).
There's a phone # / address for the town's utility office on the site as well, that would be the next step.
As with all copyright issues, the legal implications from a bunch of different directions are quite sticky and blurry on this one. The bottom line is, to avoid that, the city really should have asked permission to use the photo. The most critical question that as a photographer would be on my mind if this happened to me is "who owns the property"? Being "historic", is the property currently "publicly" owned by the city? I wasn't able to find that out online. If so, that gives the city a lot of legal standing here, and is legally better for you as well. No third party for you to get in trouble with. If it is privately owned, that's a whole 'nother can of worms because now there's a third party to this story. That isn't at all good for the city and as ridiculously unlikely it may be, still 'technically' legally bad for you as well. If that is the case, and presuming this is all about "principle", then I strongly recommend going straight to a cease and desist letter to have the image taken down.
You note: may be, still 'technically' legally bad for you as well, I'm not sure I follow. I took this photo from a public space (sidewalk), there couldn't be any "expectation of privacy". The photo is being used for non-commercial purposes (by me, at least). The photo the city is publishing is absolutely mine (check the flags waving in the breeze, that would be impossible to replicate. Also, they didn't even change the filename!).
I guess it's about the principle, I'm not looking for money. Just provide credit, or pull the photo. And ask first, next time (to whomever).
Meanwhile, still no response, guess I need pull together a "strongly worded letter" and send to them.
@lsquared So if a photographer legally makes a photograph of private property (by standing on public property while photographing and not violating any reasonable expectation of privacy), then the photographer may use that image for editorial use. So yes..you're in the clear - so far. However, if someone else rips off the image and then uses it for commercial use, technically and legally speaking, the owner of the property - believe it or not - has a choice to sue the person/entity that stole and misused the photograph...or...the photographer...or, BOTH! Savage, right!
The photographer's recourse should this occur would be to then sue the individual or entity that 'stole' and misused the image for damages sufficient (or greater) than those needed to settle with the owner of the property. Geesh...lawsuits everywhere, right!
Now, granted, this actually occurring is incredibly rare. And the property owner usually doesn't prevail unless said image contains a representation of something branded, trademarked, or in itself copyrighted. But, for the sake of "principle", it is a legitimate scenario and a legal liability to you (however small or unlikely). So for sure, the person who did this must ask permission in order for copyright and terms of use to be satisfied by all parties. Both you, and potentially the owner of the property (if privately owned). If the property is publicly owned by the city, then while they need no permission for that, they still need your permission and terms of use for the photo.
Also if the property is privately owned, then allowing use of the photo for credit is a just a tad sticky too...presuming no property release exists. With no release, the property owner could *try* to argue commercial use because crediting your name (which is your personal brand) crosses from editorial use to commercial use due to the fact it may constitute "gain" for you. (i.e., advertising your services). Pretty flimsy argument almost never won, but can still be a waste of time and money fighting it.
Once again, I'm quite admittedly in the realms of stuff that rarely happens...and in your particular occurrence, would be absolutely gob-smacked if it did. But...as you said...if about the principle, then to really educate the offenders on proper copyright etiquette, in my opinion, the city should receive from you a DMCA Take-Down Notice Pursuant to the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act and a Cease and Desist letter prohibiting use until the terms of use can be established and agreed on by all parties.
(P.S. edit) The fact that everyone who has a cell phone now also is a photographer, most of this stuff is ignored. The younger generation just isn't aware of it. The internet (and social media) is deluge of images, mostly stolen and nobody cares as long as people hit the "Like" button and "Follow". And, usually explains why most digital image consumer are most often pretty ignorant about actual copyright law. It's really unfortunate.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
On the other side, there have been some pictures posted here that were taken by someone else but the 365 member took credit for it and didn't give credit to the person who took it.
It is a shame that these things happen.
Hope you get some response from the web site.
I guess at the end of the day, people think anything on the internet is available for public use and it isn't considered theft because it is up there already. The rise of the meme just adds to that - reposted everywhere, copied and forwarded thousands of times without a thought.
I love your photographs. On here, I tend to change the privacy settings after a few days as a number of mine were showing up on pinterest and instagram, taken and published as if someone else's and I just didn't like it.
Do let us know what happens. I think a challenge is right. To my mind, it is just good manners to ask your permission first, even if there is no financials involved.
No response from Montezuma yet, but that's not really surprising. We're talking about a town of under 1,000 people, probably a part time "web master".
I'm willing to chalk it up to ignorance, not malice. Especially if they respond (in an appropriate manner).
That said, the casual way that people seem to treat IP (Intellectual property) is pretty frustrating. From using photos to downloading music to any number of other examples. And if it were to turn out that somebody else copied it and got paid... well, that would change everything.
I'll post any updates.
I wanted to add this, why not tell the city that they should give you credit for the image and also make a donation to a charity of their choice.for the use of the image.
I guess it's not all that surprising, but is disappointing.
I suppose I'll reach out again next week, after they've had a full week. I wonder if I could find a cease-and-desist letter template on the web. Looks like their town council meetings are the third Thursday of each month ...
that said, it's been not even a week... given "bureaucracy" (in a town of 1000???) perhaps your note is going back and forth between folks trying to figure out what they need to do now... or you know, perhaps the person tasked with checking the general email box is off sick...
And really, I only want an apology, and either credit or take down the photo. It's the principle, not the dollars (for me, at least).
There's a phone # / address for the town's utility office on the site as well, that would be the next step.
You note: may be, still 'technically' legally bad for you as well, I'm not sure I follow. I took this photo from a public space (sidewalk), there couldn't be any "expectation of privacy". The photo is being used for non-commercial purposes (by me, at least). The photo the city is publishing is absolutely mine (check the flags waving in the breeze, that would be impossible to replicate. Also, they didn't even change the filename!).
I guess it's about the principle, I'm not looking for money. Just provide credit, or pull the photo. And ask first, next time (to whomever).
Meanwhile, still no response, guess I need pull together a "strongly worded letter" and send to them.
The photographer's recourse should this occur would be to then sue the individual or entity that 'stole' and misused the image for damages sufficient (or greater) than those needed to settle with the owner of the property. Geesh...lawsuits everywhere, right!
Now, granted, this actually occurring is incredibly rare. And the property owner usually doesn't prevail unless said image contains a representation of something branded, trademarked, or in itself copyrighted. But, for the sake of "principle", it is a legitimate scenario and a legal liability to you (however small or unlikely). So for sure, the person who did this must ask permission in order for copyright and terms of use to be satisfied by all parties. Both you, and potentially the owner of the property (if privately owned). If the property is publicly owned by the city, then while they need no permission for that, they still need your permission and terms of use for the photo.
Also if the property is privately owned, then allowing use of the photo for credit is a just a tad sticky too...presuming no property release exists. With no release, the property owner could *try* to argue commercial use because crediting your name (which is your personal brand) crosses from editorial use to commercial use due to the fact it may constitute "gain" for you. (i.e., advertising your services). Pretty flimsy argument almost never won, but can still be a waste of time and money fighting it.
Once again, I'm quite admittedly in the realms of stuff that rarely happens...and in your particular occurrence, would be absolutely gob-smacked if it did. But...as you said...if about the principle, then to really educate the offenders on proper copyright etiquette, in my opinion, the city should receive from you a DMCA Take-Down Notice Pursuant to the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act and a Cease and Desist letter prohibiting use until the terms of use can be established and agreed on by all parties.
(P.S. edit) The fact that everyone who has a cell phone now also is a photographer, most of this stuff is ignored. The younger generation just isn't aware of it. The internet (and social media) is deluge of images, mostly stolen and nobody cares as long as people hit the "Like" button and "Follow". And, usually explains why most digital image consumer are most often pretty ignorant about actual copyright law. It's really unfortunate.