We read a thread online about the \u201cmerits\u201d of stock agencies. To us that could have been a one-sentence story, but we digress. In the comments section someone said how they owned the copyright and could pursue an infringer. Again, that falls into the category of \u201cYa didn\u2019t read the fine print, didja?\u201d<\/p>\n
We\u2019ve seen this slight of hand in stock contracts, purchase orders, contest entries, and so on. It\u2019s the old shell game, but in fine print. Your copyright is the pea and the words are the shell that go over the pea. In this game, you get to keep your pea, but you\u2019re now standing there in a barrel because you have no clothes or money. But you get to keep your pea.<\/p>\n
Let us explain for those that miss our analogy. You own your copyright, but you\u2019ve signed away all rights that mean anything that go with copyright. Like resale rights, alteration rights, and the right to go after and sue infringements. Basically, you own the copyright in name only.<\/p>\n
Here\u2019s a real life, from the files, example. You are signed with big name stock agency, Gottcha Photos. They license one of your great images to Bigass Worldwide Mega Company. Bigass violates the license by using it beyond the media and the time period allowed. Because they are world wide and high visibility usage, that type of infringement usually settles for anywhere from mid 5 figures to low 6 figures. Great, you contact a lawyer who finds out that your image is licensed through Gottcha Photos. Knowing their crappy contract that most photographers sign without reading, like this client, lawyer says can\u2019t sue because Gottcha has the rights to pursue infringements. \u201cNo problemo!\u201d says the photographer (who isn\u2019t even Hispanic). Photographer says they will get their person at Gottcha Photos to release the right so they can sue. Calls said person who says they\u2019ll get back to photographer.<\/p>\n
And they do call back, to inform photographer, \u201cCongrats! We settled with the infringer for you!\u201d Photographer\u2019s cut of the settlement? Mid five figures? High five figures? Nope, $.75 cents, USD. Why? Because the infringer is a \u201ccustomer\u201d who licenses many images from Gottcha Photos. The photographer? Why that\u2019s just a supplier, not a customer. That\u2019s much lower on the totem pole. In fact, photographers are below ground level.<\/p>\n
Typically stock agencies to whom you have foolishly given the right to pursue your infringements, have also obtained from you the right to settle any such claims in their sole discretion<\/strong>.\u00a0 That means you have no input<\/em> if they want to settle on the cheap, such as with one of their best customers.<\/p>\n But at least the photographer still owns the copyright! That\u2019s like owning a car, and everyone but you gets to drive it. Ask the parent of a teenager that drives if you don’t understand how that works. Beware of the fine print language meant to distract you from all the other fine print. It\u2019s the old shell game.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" We read a thread online about the \u201cmerits\u201d of stock agencies. To us that could have been a one-sentence story, but we digress. In the comments section someone said how they owned the copyright and could pursue an infringer. Again, that falls into the category of \u201cYa didn\u2019t read the fine print, didja?\u201d We\u2019ve seen […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[151,1,7,613,15,5,20],"tags":[46,652,345,44],"class_list":["post-1748","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-be-aware","category-copyright-info","category-giving-it-away","category-lawyers","category-legal","category-paperwork","category-stuff-you-should-know","tag-copyright","tag-fine-print","tag-stock-agencies","tag-stock-photography-2"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1748","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1748"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1748\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1749,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1748\/revisions\/1749"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1748"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1748"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thecopyrightzone.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1748"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}