If you have a blog tied to your business website, is posting there part of advertising? Or it's only considered editorial work and the advertising law does not apply here?
Is it considered advertising by posting on your business blog? Or is it simply editorial work and no one has the rights to tell you to take a picture down?
Yeah, that's what I thought too. A local photog group brought this up.
A venue is asking them to take down the photo (for some reasons) and some people are telling them "no don't do it it's a nice picture"
I just told them to take it down and move on. But people said otherwise, and which brought up "blog" and how it's not advertising by posting on your business blog.....
MBMK wrote:
Yeah, that's what I thought too. A local photog group brought this up.
A venue is asking them to take down the photo (for some reasons) and some people are telling them "no don't do it it's a nice picture"
I just told them to take it down and move on. But people said otherwise, and which brought up "blog" and how it's not advertising by posting on your business blog.....
That's a whole other can of worms. Even if the blog is considered commercial, they may have to prove that the inclusion of the venue in a photograph is seen to be actively promoting the product. A court could rule that the inclusion of the venue or other property of the venue is incedental or context. Just like someone holding a can of coke in front of the Sydney opera house doesn't neccessarily mean the opera house trust is promoting Coke even though the buildings image is copyrighted and you may have taken the shot on the grounds.
So basically the venue messed up. They aren't allowed to use sparkers in that county. But the venue didn't tell the clients that, and I guess they found out after. So they emailed the photographer asking them to take it down.
Although, that picture doesn't show the venue at 100% the rest of the photos ties it to that one picture since it was on a blog.
I suggested she could take down all the picture and leave that one up (since she loves it so much) or just get rid of that and keep the rest.
MBMK wrote:
So basically the venue messed up. They aren't allowed to use sparkers in that county. But the venue didn't tell the clients that, and I guess they found out after. So they emailed the photographer asking them to take it down.
Although, that picture doesn't show the venue at 100% the rest of the photos ties it to that one picture since it was on a blog.
I suggested she could take down all the picture and leave that one up (since she loves it so much) or just get rid of that and keep the rest.
Uhhhh so yeah, I would say take the photo down. Otherwise it's just going to confuse other clients who might be getting married there even if it doesn't get the venue in trouble (odds are low that it would).
I think a venue is much more important to your business than a single image in a blog post, so yeah I would do what they ask...
That's exactly what I told them Kurtis. If she wants to be in their good grace, she should take them down. I told her don't get to a point where next time a client books her for that location, the venue tells them "sorry we won't allow her to photograph at our venue"
**BTW guys, this is not me, not my clients, not my venue. I was just making sure I was in the rights giving her that suggestion**
I think it depends on your business and how you have your site and blog designed and the way your content is presented. If you post images with huge watermarks with fancy border and you're always like "Julie and Doug got married at Oceanside house and they chose me to photograph their wedding, they're awesome and we had the best time." That sounds kinda advertorial to me. But if you just post images and say stuff like "Julie and Doug were married Saturday at Oceanside House." That's just letting people know what happened and isn't intended to convey that you were a big part of the equation.
