Best bet is to contact them and ask for a photo credit, no point getting into a "it's my copyright, do what I say" fight because you'll only look like a dick and it won't accomplish anything, whereas at least if they credit you you might get some traffic out of it.
Newspaper was provided the photo by the subject. This happens all the time. Your issue is with your client, not the paper. The image is credited, it was provided by Briana Payne. The reporter knows nothing about you, the photo editor knows nothing about you. The reporter did a story on a local singer in a music contest, and the girl provided the photo to the reporter. The photo editor probably thought "great, one less image to send a staffer/freelancer to get." The paper doesn't ask about usage rights or any of that nonsense because those laws don't apply to newspapers when it comes to distribution of information. And they likely assumed if the subject provided the photo then they had every right to, and if they didn't, their issue, not the papers. This was a story in a local paper, not a feature in Rolling Stone.
All you can do is take the issue up with your client and sue for breach of license agreement. You can also call/email the paper and ask that they change the credit to "photo provided by Imagine Photo AZ."
If you have them pull it, you'll look like a dick, and the singer will likely spread the word that she got a feature article and you pulled the use of photos that she likely only got just for the purpose of PR, exactly this kind of thing. The paper won't pay you anything, papers don't work that way. They only pay for commissioned assignments, not for reader submitted material.
I can't imagine this is worth fighting. The client gave the photo away to use as promotion - which quite honestly is probably within the usage agreements of many photographers.
Besides, online photo usage for news purposes is worth almost nothing (it's scary how little money these people have).
I wonder why newspapers (and other publications) don't require people to submit a copy of the license they have to give away someone's work. My print release is for person use only and plainly states that I retain all editorial and commercial use rights. I just find it BS that these publications don't have to at least do some due diligence and confirm with the originator of the art that they do in fact have permission to publish the image.
ckhagen wrote:
I wonder why newspapers (and other publications) don't require people to submit a copy of the license they have to give away someone's work. My print release is for person use only and plainly states that I retain all editorial and commercial use rights. I just find it BS that these publications don't have to at least do some due diligence and confirm with the originator of the art that they do in fact have permission to publish the image.
p.1 #10 · Newspaper ran a photo without permission
ckhagen wrote:
I wonder why newspapers (and other publications) don't require people to submit a copy of the license they have to give away someone's work. My print release is for person use only and plainly states that I retain all editorial and commercial use rights. I just find it BS that these publications don't have to at least do some due diligence and confirm with the originator of the art that they do in fact have permission to publish the image.
The news industry is in shambles. Everyone is going broke and bankrupt. People are getting laid off right and left. Everything is being slashed to try to remain afloat. One main area where they are cutting serious money is in that of photojournalism. User submitted photo and video are a HUGE boom for this industry where salaried photojournalists are considered an extravagant expense.
The bottom line is that they are so thankful for content they don't have to pay for, most of them don't care where it came from. There are exceptions of course. If it were an obviously copyrighted photo taken by someone who had the capability of suing them, it might be different. A user submitting a professional photo of themselves is usually considered pretty "safe".
p.1 #12 · Newspaper ran a photo without permission
deepbluejh wrote:
I can't imagine this is worth fighting. The client gave the photo away to use as promotion - which quite honestly is probably within the usage agreements of many photographers.
What was your original license like? My license to performers includes "promotional" usage. This would be just fine with me. Now.... if the photo were being used as part of a feature story, in a print magazine (i.e, people are paying money to read the story in print), you may be able to argue that the image is being used commercially and you should be compensated.
p.1 #13 · Newspaper ran a photo without permission
I'm sure your client is thrilled to be in the newspaper. Should have been credited, but honestly I wouldn't sweat it. Not a big enough deal to get worked up about.
p.1 #14 · Newspaper ran a photo without permission
Ask the client to credit you via social media posts! I'm sure she'd be happy to assuming you asked in a tactful, kind way.
Something similar happened to me recently. A former bride of mine tagged me in a facebook post linking to a local news video that had one of our photos in it for a brief second. Neither of us know how it got there, but we thought it was funny more than anything as it was a group shot of 50 people.
p.1 #15 · Newspaper ran a photo without permission
You can't pull it out of the paper now. Will the photo be used elsewhere? Ask your client about this and to request photo credit if it used elsewhere. MattSepeta's suggestion on social media is excellent.
Don't count on getting a lot of calls from a photo credit; it rarely happens. Your client is happy, and her recommendations to others and meeting her own future needs will be your best 'payment' for this usage of the photo.
p.1 #17 · Newspaper ran a photo without permission
Most newspapers are understaffed, and in a hurry. If it's going to take some intern or editor more than one phone call or email to track down the creator, license holder of a image they will move onto something else and the photo won't run. That's why they don't do it!
It looks like a pr pic used as intended, for pr. Im not sure what the photog is hoping will happen. I'd think the paper would run a correction giving you the photo credit. But no one except you cares about that. IMO the best thing is to keep the singer happy, but tell her that the images should have your name on it although no one can control what the paper prints....
p.1 #18 · Newspaper ran a photo without permission
maxwell1295 wrote:
Why not turn this into a positive and use this as an excuse to self-promote? I would be screen-capturing, Facebooking, blogging SOB right about now...
THIS!!!!^^^^^^
You can also contact the newspaper and politely ask for a photo credit. If they are legit they won't hesitate to give you one. In this case it was the bride who is at fault but don't even THINK about bothering her about this. Turn this into a positive and move on. (and the photo is incredible btw)
p.1 #20 · Newspaper ran a photo without permission
I decided that my initial reaction was more ego (not being credited) than anything, and I'm already over it. I def appreciate the input from everyone, and I'm actually going to do what Maxwell1295 said and post the article on our FB page to get further publicity from it.
Good thoughts everyone, really appreciate the input.
