A bit of advice please. I was recently asked to take a few photos at a protest and was approach by a local councillor to see if he could post a pic on his website. Of course I said yes and for free.
When I emailed him I told him that I was just starting out and would be grateful if he could let me know if he used the pic. He did use it, didn't tell me and cropped off my small watermark bottom left.
The picture is now doing nothing for me but do I tell him to take it down?
Thanks all. That'll teach me to dance with the devil.
I'd be pissed off I know that! If it were me, I probably wouldn't tell him to take it down, (because it's a good cause in this case), but I WOULD inform him that the watermark is a personal addition to you as a photographer and he's violating that 'copyright'. I would also tell him that in future it would serve him well if he gave that courtesy to all photgraphers that kindly loan him their captures.
i would be furious !!! , good cause or not u were kind enough to allow him to use the shot so u should be credited , i would tell him to use the full shot with watermark or take it off completely ! ....... BUT this post has kinda made me aware of this and if anyone ever asked to use one of my shots i would stipulate that NO changes are made to it end of :)
Hey Richard, What I'll say may not be the best solution to this issue but I'm guessing the guy took the liberty to crop off your watermark as you were kind enough to do it for free. (which is still not done at all!)
My advice, next time, don't tell anyone you're a newbie & starting out, unless you know them well. It probably will not let them take you for granted.
Good luck!
I think I'd be rather irritated to have had my watermark removed by someone using my shot for free.. Of course I might still be pleased as punch that someone used my shot in the first place so my irritation would be kind of mixed.. Did he give you photo credit anywhere else on the site somewhere? Personally tho, if it were my situation, he'd be listening to what I thought of him removing my watermark if the watermark in no way obscured the shot..
I guess there's also the possibility that he didn't do this himself, a techie put the photo on for him, and he's not even aware that he's offended you at all.
Or, he may have had to take the watermark off as it may been seen as advertising on a councillor's website. I think they are bound by guidelines preventing 'The promotion of personal financial interests or commercial ventures'
Either way, I wouldn't assume straight up that he intended to do you over - even though he's a Tory (full agreement with @vikdaddy sentiments)
A swift '' hello old chap, my watermark seems to have been mistakenly left off, can you correct it'' email should do the trick, or give you answers. :-)
I wonder if the crop was done because he liked the look of it better? He's taken out some of the top of the image too so maybe he decided to do it for that reason? Still, he should credit you for the image
I would ask him to credit you, but if you agreed to provide the photo for free, and didn't specify that you required credit for it if it was used, then I would expect him to crop off a watermark and use it as his own.
@indiannie_jones ~ tories are the bastards that are causing mayhem in our country .... well not so much scotland , england have it worse so i guess im a little safer than some lol !
a) A member of a British political party, founded in 1689, that was the opposition party to the Whigs and has been known as the Conservative Party since about 1832.
b) a bastard :P
c) the tories are a political party i personally didnt vote for :P
**** i accept no responsibility for these definitions i copied from another site lol ......... just incase there are tory supporters on the boards :S
@flamez@indiannie_jones so for us Americans is a B'std like a crazy conservative or like a looney liberal. Or just kind of uptight. We used to have Whigs here from the Scottish Presbyterians back in the day. Oh and I blame all politicians for what is wrong with our country.
@richjane77 I like to stir the pot and have a person in the legal field write the letter for you. You can say that you believe that there was a minor editing mistake for his website because they obviously took your watermark off and gave you no credit, which may just be a touch illegal and you would hate to have to go through proper channels and such. Also take a screen shot and save it to prove what you are saying.
@brumbe ~ to be quite honest i have no idea haha ! i only kinda got a vague interest in the UK's very lame political parties the last few years , and only just understanding things so asking me to compare to the american politics is like asking the blind to lead the blind haha ! ..... im not really biased on policitical parties , i think they are all b*stards really lol .......
Maybe I'm blind, but I can't see the watermark in the original... In that case, who cares. You can't see it anyway. But yes I'd agree with Adam Kelly above.
@flamez I have to agree on them all being b'stds. I deal with local politicians often, and would prefer hiding from all of them. I guess we will stick to taking excellent photos which is much more interesting.
I'd suggest a polite letter or email aking him to credit you in the blog post. A simple statment such as "Photo by Richard Jane" would do the job nicely, I assume. Don't mention the cropping. If he doesn't alter his post then, contact the local press.
I would ask politly if there had been mistake, then if not corrected take appropriate action. Once I taught a class at a seminar, handed out an outline of the presentation, then later found a web page where it was uploaded to the internet and not one mention of credit to me. It was the paper I wrote, word for word. End result - they took the page down until they could get someone to re-write it a bit differently.
I agree with most everyone on here...he should either reload the image with the watermark or give you credit on the site. After all, HIS site has copyright on it so he should know the value of copyright. I had a similar situation with a website I created for my school --- I spent 50+ hours creating the page then a technology director from another school district asked if he could "share" my site with his colleagues. I graciously said "Yes" only to find out later that he completely copied and pasted all my hard work into his site, claiming it as his own. He of all people should have known better. Sharing a link is completely different from STEALING the work. I confronted him and now have a very tiny credit on his site. Jerk!
I, like @blitz1904, can't see a watermark in your original either. What exactly were your original terms of use? If you didn't specifically require him to give you credit on the website then you may not have any course for legal action. I'm assuming that by agreeing to let him use your photo on the his website, that this is a cause that you agree with, and therefore why not let him keep using the shot. Common courtesy would say that he should give you photo credit on the site, but we don't live in an overly courteous world sometimes. I think an email to him requesting a credit should do. If he refuses I'm not sure there is much you can do unless you had some sort of written agreement that he violated. This side of photography is as much of a learning curve as the stuff behind the lens. So in the future I would definitely make sure you have any agreements in writing. Good luck with your situation, and please let us know what happens.
Quit being such a nice guy, and tell him the photo cannot be used unless you have photo credit and your copyright watermark on the image. If not, ask him to kindly remove the photo. Some people just don't get it. Shame on him, and good luck to you!
1. do nothing, grovel and chalk it up to experience while cursing the politician's whole clan, or
2. write a polite but firm letter to the Hon. Councillor telling him that you have noticed in viewing his website that he had used the photograph you so kindly sent to him via e-mail on such and such date; that you noticed that in using the photograph the portion bearing your name or watermark had been omitted and/or altered but that the website indicated no mention of your name as owner of the photograph. perhaps it was an oversight on the part of his staff or the person who prepared and posted the article, therefore would he kindly give instructions to either (a) remove the photograph that had been altered and replace it with the photograph originally transmitted to him bearing your name/watermark, or (b) put some form of acceptable wording acknowledging you as the owner/photographer of the photograph in question. in your letter you will give him a firm deadline for this request to be done, say 5:oo p.m. or the close of business on such and such date. give him at least a week (which is more than a reasonable amoutn of time) from the date you think he would've received your letter.
i would caution you, though, that this person might or would resist to comply with your request, in which case, if you have sufficient evidence, which i'm sure you do, you may have or want to refer the matter to a solicitor where you are situated. the solicitor will determine whether legal action is required or beneficial. but mind you, it will cost you money.
from looking at your original and the published copy, he did take out a portion of the top and bottom but still used a substantial portion of your photograph; i do not however, see your watermark on the one posted in your album, but assume that the copy you sent him bears your name/mark on it.
since he is a politician and he is not using your photograph for commercial purposes (your legal person should be able to determine that - how is it different from using the photograph to gain voters' confidence), it is with hope that he will consider and acquiesce to your request since if and when the matter reaches the attention of his constituents, colleagues or the (local) press, his credibility as a politician will be at stake.
for future, when transmitting or submitting your work by e-mail or other means of transmission, make sure that there is a notice (a sufficient blurb) that you as the photographer retains copyright ownership of such photograph and that its use for whatever purposes is governed by copyright laws in force. also, whether or not it is your intention to sell or profit from your work, you must make yourself aware of such copyright laws.
please note i am not a lawyer and i have no idea whatsoever of the copyright laws in your country. as such, the above is not intended as a legal advice. good luck and do let us know here how the matter turns out.
Thank you all for your responses and advice. Well what a difference a polite email makes. I've had a phone call from the councillor who is going to ask his webmaster to reinstate the watermark.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Cheeky bastard indeed though, it'd be a bad time of year for anybody to hear anything negative about him in that profession...
make him credit you for the pic or take it down
My advice, next time, don't tell anyone you're a newbie & starting out, unless you know them well. It probably will not let them take you for granted.
Good luck!
Can't believe he has a © mark on his webpage as he obviously doesn't respect other people's copyright.
Or, he may have had to take the watermark off as it may been seen as advertising on a councillor's website. I think they are bound by guidelines preventing 'The promotion of personal financial interests or commercial ventures'
Either way, I wouldn't assume straight up that he intended to do you over - even though he's a Tory (full agreement with @vikdaddy sentiments)
A swift '' hello old chap, my watermark seems to have been mistakenly left off, can you correct it'' email should do the trick, or give you answers. :-)
D:
Why won't you tell me? Am I a tory? I'm not a bastard :(
Definition of tory .....
a) A member of a British political party, founded in 1689, that was the opposition party to the Whigs and has been known as the Conservative Party since about 1832.
b) a bastard :P
c) the tories are a political party i personally didnt vote for :P
**** i accept no responsibility for these definitions i copied from another site lol ......... just incase there are tory supporters on the boards :S
Personally, I am appalled at this tory bastard's behaviour.
Glad that I could stir up some informed and articulate political debate :)
@richjane77 I like to stir the pot and have a person in the legal field write the letter for you. You can say that you believe that there was a minor editing mistake for his website because they obviously took your watermark off and gave you no credit, which may just be a touch illegal and you would hate to have to go through proper channels and such. Also take a screen shot and save it to prove what you are saying.
yea , go to the local paper, and grass the tory git up!
All Rights Reserved.)
So if you ask him to take it down and he dosnt you can sue :D
there are two things you can do:
1. do nothing, grovel and chalk it up to experience while cursing the politician's whole clan, or
2. write a polite but firm letter to the Hon. Councillor telling him that you have noticed in viewing his website that he had used the photograph you so kindly sent to him via e-mail on such and such date; that you noticed that in using the photograph the portion bearing your name or watermark had been omitted and/or altered but that the website indicated no mention of your name as owner of the photograph. perhaps it was an oversight on the part of his staff or the person who prepared and posted the article, therefore would he kindly give instructions to either (a) remove the photograph that had been altered and replace it with the photograph originally transmitted to him bearing your name/watermark, or (b) put some form of acceptable wording acknowledging you as the owner/photographer of the photograph in question. in your letter you will give him a firm deadline for this request to be done, say 5:oo p.m. or the close of business on such and such date. give him at least a week (which is more than a reasonable amoutn of time) from the date you think he would've received your letter.
i would caution you, though, that this person might or would resist to comply with your request, in which case, if you have sufficient evidence, which i'm sure you do, you may have or want to refer the matter to a solicitor where you are situated. the solicitor will determine whether legal action is required or beneficial. but mind you, it will cost you money.
from looking at your original and the published copy, he did take out a portion of the top and bottom but still used a substantial portion of your photograph; i do not however, see your watermark on the one posted in your album, but assume that the copy you sent him bears your name/mark on it.
since he is a politician and he is not using your photograph for commercial purposes (your legal person should be able to determine that - how is it different from using the photograph to gain voters' confidence), it is with hope that he will consider and acquiesce to your request since if and when the matter reaches the attention of his constituents, colleagues or the (local) press, his credibility as a politician will be at stake.
for future, when transmitting or submitting your work by e-mail or other means of transmission, make sure that there is a notice (a sufficient blurb) that you as the photographer retains copyright ownership of such photograph and that its use for whatever purposes is governed by copyright laws in force. also, whether or not it is your intention to sell or profit from your work, you must make yourself aware of such copyright laws.
please note i am not a lawyer and i have no idea whatsoever of the copyright laws in your country. as such, the above is not intended as a legal advice. good luck and do let us know here how the matter turns out.
Good people in the world (and bad webmasters).
Thanks all.
Rich
**THREAD IS CLOSED**