Open Photography Forums  
HOME FORUMS NEWS FAQ SEARCH

Go Back   Open Photography Forums > OPF Welcome Hall > Breaking News

Breaking News Updates, innovations, equipment: moderated!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 23rd, 2009, 04:51 AM
Nicolas Claris Nicolas Claris is offline
Administrator/Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bordeaux
Posts: 5,439
Default Another hit to PJs rights in the UK (we've the same in France)

I picked-up this info while I'm travelling… no time to comment, but the matter is too much improtant, so I just quote…

Quote:
Guardian News and Media has proposed changes to the terms and conditions under which it commissions photography.

If you are a photographer who could be affected by the proposals, please sign the letter below.

- - - - - - - - - -

To: Chris Elliot, Managing Editor, Guardian News and Media

We have been made aware of your changes to terms and conditions for commissioned photography, issued to contributors on 28 July 2009.

At a time when press photographers are suffering severe hardship as a result of the economic downturn, it comes as a further blow to be informed that GNM demands unlimited re-use of our photographs free of charge.

The reduced demand for photographs during the recession will force many photographers out of business. If we have to allow free use of our images this procession will be accelerated.

The Guardian and Observer have a proud record of championing the cause of downtrodden workers in other countries.

We call upon GNM and the Scott Trust to behave in a manner consistent with their editorial policy, and respect the rights of their suppliers to be treated in a fair and equitable manner and in accordance with the spirit of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

As a first step, we urge you to enter into meaningful negotiations with the National Union of Journalists and other organisations representing photographers.
LINK
__________________
WEBSITE - FACEBOOK - INSTAGRAM
Please do no repost my images elsewhere than OPF without my permission.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old September 23rd, 2009, 05:13 AM
Bart_van_der_Wolf Bart_van_der_Wolf is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 4,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicolas Claris View Post
I picked-up this info while I'm travelling… no time to comment, but the matter is too much improtant, so I just quote…
...
LINK
I am amazed!

Not only by the shameless attempt to violate the copyrights of, in this case, photographers, but also that the UK photographers Unions cannot find an appropriate response. The UK has a reputation when it comes to unions, this is an occasion to speak out loudly, unless the unions are too divided to have an impact.

A petition is a (too) friendly first step, but a total ban by photographers to immediately deliver images (only to the GNM) when an important happening takes place, would probably be more effective. It would require some coordination, but would by itself create enough media attention (nice for the other publishers, and a warning) to get noticed.

Of course there may be specific legal/contract conditions that we/I don't know about, but it seems that photographers are not defending their rights enough. When big organisations can get away with it without meaningful protest/repercussions, it will only get worse.

Bart

Last edited by Bart_van_der_Wolf; September 23rd, 2009 at 06:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old September 23rd, 2009, 11:31 AM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

Bart

Our unions are not actually all that powerful anymore, and I don't think that any champion photographers rights.

GNM are simply taking advantage of the weak position of individual photographers to obtain increased usage - whilst it is a nice idea that they might be starved of images in case of some important event I think this is unlikely in practice. there are many many people with digital cameras now who are only too happy to receive a small sum and the recognition of being 'published' to make such an action viable.

We have to value our own work, and that is actually a much easier position to defend if we are not financially dependent on it. Of course, if your particular specialism suffers from undersupply of workers then the boot's on the other foot, but I don't think that's the case in the photographic image market any more.

Sad, but

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old September 23rd, 2009, 12:14 PM
Cem_Usakligil Cem_Usakligil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,946
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Shimwell View Post
Bart

Our unions are not actually all that powerful anymore, and I don't think that any champion photographers rights.

GNM are simply taking advantage of the weak position of individual photographers to obtain increased usage - whilst it is a nice idea that they might be starved of images in case of some important event I think this is unlikely in practice. there are many many people with digital cameras now who are only too happy to receive a small sum and the recognition of being 'published' to make such an action viable.

We have to value our own work, and that is actually a much easier position to defend if we are not financially dependent on it. Of course, if your particular specialism suffers from undersupply of workers then the boot's on the other foot, but I don't think that's the case in the photographic image market any more.

Sad, but

Mike
I agree completely, although I fully sympathize with what has been said by Bart.
I have heard on the news today that the newspapers are doing rather badly all over the world. They have to compete with the free news sources all over the Internet and they are losing this battle. They have to create web pages and make them accessible free of charge to their readers or they'll flee to the competition. A news article with a picture on a newspaper has a limited time span and limited numbers whereas the same article/picture on the web can reach higher numbers and will be available almost indefinitely. So the photographers and writers are asking for better compensation since their products are thus accessed more. On the one hand, it is logical. On the other, it is self destructive. Since the papers do no get any substantial revenue for their web pages and also given their precarious economic situation, they shall eventually not use the expensive pictures by professionals and will seek solace in publishing amateurs' pictures free of charge.

Sad indeed :-( ("..for the times, they are a changing....")
__________________
Kind Regards, Cem

flickr
website
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old September 23rd, 2009, 12:59 PM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 32,752
Default The Greatest Risk is to Freelance News Photographers!

For now, the money shots in news will be from trained newsmen and not the myriads of people with cameras. We need the pros and the resources behind them to dig out the facts not just by chance catch something. In any case, freelance photographers who risk life and limb shouldn't be included in these proposed rules. That will damage the very survival of the profession.

Asher

BTW, News photographers employed by a news organization in the EU, are they © owners?
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old September 23rd, 2009, 01:12 PM
Bart_van_der_Wolf Bart_van_der_Wolf is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 4,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cem_Usakligil View Post
I agree completely, although I fully sympathize with what has been said by Bart.
I have heard on the news today that the newspapers are doing rather badly all over the world. They have to compete with the free news sources all over the Internet and they are losing this battle. They have to create web pages and make them accessible free of charge to their readers or they'll flee to the competition.
That's a flawed business model, giving information for free, and that's to blame on the slow adaptation of the new media by the traditional publishers. No reason to pass the losses on to one's contractors, no reason al all.

Quote:
... Since the papers do no get any substantial revenue for their web pages and also given their precarious economic situation, they shall eventually not use the expensive pictures by professionals and will seek solace in publishing amateurs' pictures free of charge.
I'm sure there are also amateurs who can write articles as well, or better, than a number of the current journalists. So should journalists not get paid for their web publications, after all they already typed it for the paper editions? No, it's the publishers' business model that is flawed!

Bart

P.S. English language Interview with John Malone (27-07-2009) on Dutch RTL network:
http://www.rtl.nl/system/redirect?ba...0yMDA5LnhtbCAg
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old September 23rd, 2009, 01:16 PM
Bart_van_der_Wolf Bart_van_der_Wolf is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 4,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
BTW, News photographers employed by a news organization in the EU, are they © owners?
Not if they are employed by the agency, the agency is the copyright holder in that case.
But if one sells an image to an agency, one can agree (or not) on the payment details, but the copyright remains with the photographer.

Bart
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old September 23rd, 2009, 03:20 PM
Cem_Usakligil Cem_Usakligil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,946
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart_van_der_Wolf View Post
That's a flawed business model, giving information for free, and that's to blame on the slow adaptation of the new media by the traditional publishers. No reason to pass the losses on to one's contractors, no reason al all..
Hi Bart,

You are right; that is why I wrote "for the times, they are a changing.." as they didn't (can't) change their old business models. But in any business losing money, losses will eventually be passed onto somebody down the line. It is the free choice of photographers whether they want to play ball and if so, according to whose rules.

Cheers,
__________________
Kind Regards, Cem

flickr
website
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Beware of this: Mpix Pro Rights Grab Ben Rubinstein Breaking News 3 July 27th, 2009 01:46 PM
My condolences to Nicolas, Tim and all others from France ;-) Cem_Usakligil Layback Cafe 20 June 23rd, 2008 12:49 AM
Hello from Nice, France Chris Lilley Introduce Yourself 1 June 11th, 2008 04:10 PM
First Ammendment Rights Alert doug anderson Photojournalism - Street - Documentary 4 June 11th, 2008 01:22 PM
Nikon & Rights Grab Competition - (Update) Michael Brown Layback Cafe 11 September 22nd, 2006 10:24 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:12 PM.


Posting images or text grants license to OPF, yet © of such remain with its creator. Still, all assembled discussion © 2006-2017 Asher Kelman (all rights reserved) Posts with new theme or unusual image might be moved/copied to a new thread!