Sensible Netnonsense

Online photo contests--Who really wins?

Sep 16, 2008 17:07

I just read something interesting off of Azrael's blog: One of our old online acquaintances, Parc, got one of his artsy-fartsy photos reprinted on a billboard! Sounds like good news, right? Great news if you consider how much a billboard costs... but the reality of it is much more tragic--the photographer himself was never credited for the photo.

In short, it was as if the company itself took the photo and just reprinted it in a bigger-sized replica. In short, it was as if his photo was ripped off.

This is the photo that was used for the billboard.

Photo copyright: Parc Cruz (parconline.multiply.com)

Actually, this is the story I got off of Parc, the photographer in question.

The photo contest: Where it all began
The billboard was for a well-known land and property developer here in the Philippines. Parc and a few other people joined this photography contest back in 2007 when they were tasked to take great photos of the area being developed. Winners would then be decided by judges, while the rest, well, sorry... maybe next time.

But because it happened so long ago, Parc had trouble finding out the actual mechanics of the contest. And then their questions were answered: A friend they knew SMS'd the details of the mechanics of that old contest, and this was the kicker:

All entries (winning & non-winning) shall become the property
of NAME OF COMPANY with full rights to reproduce, exhibit or publish.

In short, the moment Parc submitted his entry to the contest, he gave up whatever ownership he had of that work of art. No royalties. No talent fees. No commissions.

The real cost of joining
Reading Parc's blog further exposes the unjust and unfair practice of most Online Photo Contests, this being the most common. I mean, think about it this way. Coming from an advertising and production point of view, if you asked people to submit photo entries and say that once you submit these photos, you also relinquish ownership of said photo, and we get to use them howeverwhichway we see fit, heck, that would be an enormous bit of savings! How much do high-res stock photos cost on Getty Images? How much does DeviantArt charge for its artists' work per print? Quite a sum, I tell you... and even more so if the intended use was for commercial purposes.

So now the question becomes, is it ethical for any company to say that even if that photo was someone else's, because you submitted it to me, it's mine now? Is it fair to the millions of now enthusiastic Filipino amateur photographers who are so intent on making it as an artist, to show off their talents? Coming from a photographer's point of view, do I, do we, have a right to ask for compensation? Do we have the right to say, hey, you may own the photo, but you never said you were going to use it to make money?!

On intellectual property rights
This carries on to even more copyright issues. I wrote weeks ago about a close friend had her photo re-edited and reused for a poster, and I also got wind of that other issue where a well-known blogger's photo was used for a TV show without credit. Heck, we're still talking about the recent issues of software piracy and how it has affected--maybe even permanently damaged--the local game development industry.

Copyright and intellectual property are still in their infancy in this country. And sad to say, a lot of us are being taken advantage of and taking advantage of.

Which is why Parc leaves his blog with a good piece of advice, care of another friend, Ken Go, who also helped him through this now trivial ordeal:

"Don't let people use your eagerness and excitement to their financial advantage. I suggest go to the place, practice shooting, but don't submit any files for the contest, save it, show it off in your own gallery, if they want to use your photos, let them buy it from you. Make sure you read the fine prints before submitting any of your photos."

For the company in question and my fellow colleagues in the production and advertising industry, this I have to say: Be fair. Treat these submissions as you would a supplier's material. It's not yours even if they gave it to you freely. In fact, if you want to be really, really safe and ethical about it, sure, toss in that "I OWN THE SUBMISSION AND CAN DO ANYTHING I WANT WITH IT" clause, but be more specific... state in the form that you may use it for commercial use, that it may be possible you won't get credited for it, that you may see your photo on TV... have them sign a release form, have them go into the contract with full consent. It's the just and fair thing to do, especially since you may actually earn and learn something from their hard work.

I have a feeling more and more things like this will keep happening. Especially since the Philippines is now the most active photo-sharing country in the whole world. Let's just hope that something as trivial as this can be easily avoided and that it will not become a deterrent to really talented photographers and artists to keep joining those online contests...

Recent Comments

 

Most Discussed

 

Browse Archive