Thank you for your well thought out post. I respect your view as a photographer and get where you are coming from. However, the central issues of extreme contention which keeps ELI alive and well are:
1. There is no warning letter whatsoever. Just out of the blue, a demand letter shows up demanding thousands of dollars based on no particular rhyme, reason, or formula. And yet the major media companies actually do and practice this. It is the smaller players who engage in these ugly, distasteful practices.
2. The amounts being demanded is almost an outrageous, outlandish amount that is not connected to the market value of an image. It is almost an intentionally punitive amount.
3. These are not generally criminal matters, they are civil matters. But some do their best to "criminalize" the matter and use that fear to coerce excessive amounts of money for "compensation".
4. Not all infringements are "deserving" of monetary compensation. Some infringements are of a "de minimus" nature. Yes, it is upsetting to see someone infringe your work. I have seen others directly pirate my published works over the years and I have sent unhappy emails over the years. But I made no monetary demands of them. But I did demand they take down the material. Because you know why? They are usually rinky-dink infringements from some poor schmuck who didn't know better and I called them out. And they COPIED the material, they didn't literally take it from me. I still have the source just like all photographers still have their original image. They are not deprived of their image. To be clear, I am not saying that there aren't situations where monetary demands aren't sometimes appropriate but there are a lot of cases I see where it is simply a punitive and excessive profit play.
I agree with many statements you make. We do try to educate people. And as "liberal" as I might be for the defense, some stuff I hear is just plain ridiculous. Some people propose some outlandish reasons to justify piracy and infringements. However, many people are in the grey area where it is not so clear.
Content creation does cost time and money. This website has plenty of content. I have written and produced many books and audio programs. People are constantly using ELI information and reading/using what I write without compensating me. Should I start locking down everything nailing every single person who "profited" from my work and knowledge? Should I start beating everyone for money because of the benefits they derive? If I did that, then I surmise it will be celebratory day for Higbee, Getty, Masterfile, PicRights, ImageRights, and scores of photographers.
I would say many photogs have a very narrow view of how to handle their photography. They have a very narrow view how to monetize and benefit from their photography beyond plastering it on photography websites and using companies to squeeze/extort money from ignorant/unknowing infringers.
Since I am not being paid by anyone how to handle these things, I will keep my information and my advice to photogs to myself. But I will provide a hint. Read the book "Free" by Chris Anderson. There are clues and suggestions there. But trying to beat and extort money out of every perceived wrong and de minimus infringement will result in a lot of bad energy and bad karma. That is why there is such a bad reaction. People know "fair and reasonable" when they see it. "Squeeze, scare, and get as much as you can" is still the rule of the day.
Every occupation has an occupational hazard of some kind. For any content producers (photographers, authors, publishers, etc), piracy is an occupational hazard. If you are constantly worried about beating down and extorting money from every infringer you find, that is your right but you might be in the wrong business. Keep your images private and never use it publicly. That is the only surefire way to have your images never be pirated or infringed upon.
If it costs so much to produce photos, then get out of the business! Keep it as a hobby but make money doing something else. Being a photog could be hazardous to your financial well-being and your reputation!
I know this is an old thread, but I just wanted to chime in as a photographer, who is not making a ton of money but a lot of my photos routinely get stolen and used allover the internet with zero compensation to me. I use Copytrack to help me track those websites and go after them for payment.
So I actually think it's horrible the way you guys are talking about it because, honestly, it doesn't matter if you're a small company or a blog or not profitable or whatever, you are using someone else's work for free and trying to get away with it by providing "credit", which frankly doesn't pay my bills. Photography is not free, even if you can find it on google images with a quick search and save it on your computer, it doesn't mean you can just put it up on your website for free. Content creation costs money.
So even though Copytrack starts out by asking pretty high amounts of money (which is typically our normal rate + damages because the photographer has the right to decide what kind of website can use their work), you should at the very least try to negotiate it down to something you can afford and pay it. At the end of the day if you can't afford to pay for the images then you should be using royalty free images or not have a website at all. "I don't make enough money so I should be able to use other people's work for free because they can't stop me" is a terrible argument, sorry!
I know some of you got into this situation thinking what you were doing is ok but please educate yourself on this and pay the poor photographer!! Even if it's not the full amount they're asking, anything is better than nothing and you benefited from their work so it's the right thing to do.
Show Posts
