Frustrated with club owner

Status
Not open for further replies.
I get it , It's the principle of the thing. Forget the phone call, go down there and talk face to face. Dont make threats, just explain you want to continue taking pictures in the club and you want to be compensated for him using your photo's In the future. No sense burning bridges. Trust me, be forthright and up front with what you want, what you expect, and what you expect for him to live up in this relationship down the road. Im sure you can work it out with the club owner without escalating and lawyering up( no win IMO). Sure you could win a civil case. Than what do you get a couple hunderd bucks if your lucky. The satisfaction that your "right" and more than likely losing access to the club. My suggesting is to bring him a gift( signed photo), come with a smile and keep on the list. You will more than get it back if you stay on the list. Back when I was a pro shooter I made a decent amount of money working in clubs, shooting bands, shooting shows, taking pictures of people ;)..OO. Access and contacts are everything. Just remember the right to refuse your entry is with the owner.




Gregory
 
Matus said:
Ok, of the OF will go the "lawyer route" he could be also legally attacked for photographing in a private are (the club) without a permission, or not?

If I were OP I would pursue the club owner, but first check whether he could fight back ...
Click to expand...

you can photograph your little heart out until someone from the club asks you to stop OR if there is signage prohibiting it.
 
Matus said:
Ok, of the OF will go the "lawyer route" he could be also legally attacked for photographing in a private are (the club) without a permission, or not?
Click to expand...

IANAL, but it's my understanding (from the Krages book, perhaps) that once a photo is taken on private property, it's a done deal, and some schm^H^H^H^Howner has no legal recourse except to keep you from the property in the future.

My interest was in the context of casinos, but this seems to be similar.
 
I suggest to read up on the license you gave Facebook by publicly posting your picture there, and Facebook's advertising guidelines.

And if you really want to involve a lawyer/court prepare yourself to use Delaware law in California.
 
A letter from lawyer can be expensive. If doing the legal thing, go straight to small claims court and forget ever going into a club with your camera. In the US we would go to small claims court to recover.

I had a few fotos stolen and used in an ad--after they complained and I returned their money. I should have called back and demanded payment. I was just starting my business and that theft hurt.
 
If this was not a case of "work for hire", your picture is your copyright (intellectual property) no matter where you took it.

However, if you did not register your copyright with the US Library of Congress, you are not entitled to sue for "statutory damages" and attorney's fees. You still have a small window of time to register your already "published" image so that you can retroactively do so.

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html

This issue comes up time and time again. It is amazing how many photographers "throw their work out there" without registering it first.

It boggles the mind because it is so simple to do.
 
it's also a bit disconcerting when every second day we protest what we perceive to be infringements on our rights (security guard at XXX did blah blah blah) and do little to educate ourselves as to what those rights are?

it's all over the internet. cease and desist templates are all over the internet. you rights are all over the internet.

google a "cease and desist order" and have a courier deliver it. get a signature on delivery. inform him/her that unless he/she complies within a stated time period you will file papers with the respective court. don't threaten and don't imply with any crafty language. as soon as the club owner receives it he will do the same thing you should be doing... GOOGLE. he will quickly learn of his error and i am sure a sign will be up at the front door within days prohibiting photography.
 
Those advocating jumping straight to a legal solution, keep in mind that this may simply be negligence on the owners part and not something intentional. That doesn't excuse it but it may mean there is room for discussion about future work. I'm looking at this as an opportunity for gentle education and potentially building a relationship that could work for both in the future. Yes, that would mean writing off the existing violation.

If that doesn't look promising and the OP still wants to prevent further usage, sure, a legal solution is certainly valid.

My thought process is that jumping straight to lawyers/going in hard is going to mean the loss of a venue to shoot in the future at a minimum. I doubt he would be that excited to see the OP shooting there again.

In the end, I think all of this depends on what the OP wants to get out of the situation.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Pay a lawyer to write him a letter explaining the LAW to him (he has zero rights to your photo no matter where you took it) and further explaining that he owes you $500 for use of the photo plus whatever the lawyer tacks on for his fee. He'll pay. Fast.
Click to expand...

Yes- this is the way to go. Please do us all a favor and take Chris' advice, fast. This kind of nonsense has got to be nipped in the bud, before it gets worse.
 
Let me try again:

Depending on how the email was formatted (which the OP doesn't say), most likely the club owner was in his right to do what he did - due to Facebook use. Even worse, Facebook does not allow him to mention name of the photographer.

This might be highly unpopular here, but he did not steal and does not owe anything.
 
Last edited:
http://www.facebook.com/terms.php

For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos ("IP content"), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook ("IP License"). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.

----

The license is for FACEBOOK to do what it likes with the photo (subject to your privacy and application settings), not the club owner.
 
Dfoo, you have to read that license together with Facebook's policy of contents use for advertising, in which any photos on Facebook can basically be used for advertising, as long as the contents more or less matches the advertisement. But user data (for example name of photographer) are not to be used. The Facebook license is transferrable.

You put a photo on Facebook, and it's gone.
 
Last edited:
Chances are, if you see a fb user's profile pic from S. America with a landscape from the pac nw, it's my photo.

For the OP's future use - you can limit viewing of your photos to only your fb friends, or friends of friends, or everyone. If you don't want to share it freely, why tag it, and share it on a social networking site?
 
ferider said:
Dfoo, you have to read that license together with Facebook's policy of contents use for advertising, in which any photos on Facebook can basically be used for advertising, as long as the contents more or less matches the advertisement. But user data (for example name of photographer) are not to be used. The Facebook license is transferrable.

You put a photo on Facebook, and it's gone.
Click to expand...

And facebook doesn't have to "transfer" the license? I very very much doubt it! The point being here that facebook, of course, did not transfer the license to use the photograph to the club owner. He is using it without due rights, and should pony up! According to the licensing rights on the photograph, he must get permission from the OP or from facebook. He almost certainly did neither.
 
Last edited:
how do you know this?

how do you know this?

How do you know that one of the OP's friends didn't just give it to the club owner, or maybe the club owner saw it on emusic.com or any # of facebook connected sites where user profile images are used.

How does one discern a) who the original photographer is and b) what the licensing rights are if I see the image on example.org ?


dfoo said:
And facebook doesn't have to "transfer" the license? I very very much doubt it! The point being here that facebook, of course, did not transfer the license to use the photograph to the club owner. He is using it without due rights, and should pony up! According to the licensing rights on the photograph, he must get permission from the OP or from facebook. He almost certainly did neither.
Click to expand...
 
I'd be asking myself if it is worth paying a lawyer for this... I mean, it is a club, not a magazine or publication.
 
ampguy said:
How do you know that one of the OP's friends didn't just give it to the club owner, or maybe the club owner saw it on emusic.com or any # of facebook connected sites where user profile images are used.

How does one discern a) who the original photographer is and b) what the licensing rights are if I see the image on example.org ?
Click to expand...

I don't see what that has to do with anything. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. You cannot legally take an image off the internet and use it without first verifying that you have the right to do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom