Opposite of Appropriated but credited
/forum/topic/1143199/0



Charles Gallo
Registered: Mar 23, 2007
Total Posts: 545
Country: United States

Saw the thread on "Image was appropritated but credited", but I have almost the exact opposite situation

I took some photos for a non-profit last year, and got a full tax recipit for my donation (yes guys, I didn't charge - sort of, you could say I did, then donated the cash if it makes you feel better - heck, I gave them more cash than that too - way more than I would charge for 1/2 days shooting).

Anyway, my license deal with the organization was "1 year, all rights, non exclusive, as long as I received photo credit", and they used a few of my photos (properly credited) on their web site. The ISSUE is they sent some publicity photos (who knows how many) to an online publication, who used one of my shots, but credited the organization, but no credit for me

What would YOU do (and yes, the photo copyright is registered). Remember, the 1st organization does have rights, and is an organization I support. I emailed them, and they sent an email to the person at the second website (I was CC'd), but it was never updated. I decided to let it ride



jefferies1
Registered: Jul 03, 2008
Total Posts: 2538
Country: United States

I would let it go. You made the whole thing into a donation anyway so just consider that a bit more. At least the organization got a mention and that is good for their promotion...reason you donatd the shots in the first place.



BluesWest
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 726
Country: United States

Your licensing contract --which was in writing, I hope? -- probably should have contained a clause stating that the photos were for the use of the non-profit institution only and were not to be re-distributed to any other entity.

John



RustyBug
Registered: Feb 02, 2009
Total Posts: 11957
Country: United States

It is the responsibility of the publisher to ascertain that appropriate rights for use have been extended prior to publishing (not that they all do) ... kinda like making sure a model release is signed. In your case, it sounds like they "halfway" verified that, assuming that since the organization had the rights, they were to be credited ... without really asking further about it.

In this case ... I think I send an email to the publisher directly and request the update in a very amicable manner. Sure, you could possibly try to do the whole "take down" thing ... but I'd not go there on this one, since that doesn't help your organization that you are clearly trying to help. Besides, they were granted permission to use ... just giving errant credit (honest mistake so it would seem). But, by sending a direct email, phone, letter, etc. ... they might pick up on the concept that you are interested in securing your rights regarding credit.

To me, this is a VERY SIMPLE issue of just make a name change @ photo credit vs. the whole other issue of non-permission (which they clearly have). That being said ... ... are you in anyway affiliated with the organization (i.e. a member, volunteer, etc.). If you are ... then I'd likely let it go and consider the credit given to the organization as an "extension" relative to yourself as affiliated.

Either way, I keep it "low key" ... on this one.

It is the publisher's responsibility to "get it right", so hopefully a gentle explanation of the understandable misunderstanding @ who the credit goes to is an easy fix for the publisher to "get right" ... assuming online (no printing) only.



Charles Gallo
Registered: Mar 23, 2007
Total Posts: 545
Country: United States

Like I said, I decided to let it ride - but it is an 'interesting' case



jbregar
Registered: Mar 18, 2004
Total Posts: 562
Country: United States

You can't deduct your time or services donated, just FYI. You can donate any physical goods used in the services rendered for free, but you can't deduct time donations.

You can have them pay you, then donate that money... but that's counterproductive (since you pay taxes on the money coming in and then take a deduction against it).

On the usage, it sounds like an honest mistake. I'd just let it go.



gschlact
Registered: Jun 04, 2011
Total Posts: 770
Country: United States

Charles,
Unfortunately, you provided the right to distribute. Technically speaking the organization didn't violate their agreement with you, it was the publisher that violated the agreement. Hence the publisher wrongfully used your photos and should have to pay for it, it you want to pursue. They have no recourse against the charity as it was their job to check usage rights. You can consider sending them an invoice since the Charity is not part of the violation. If they are still onli e, the. You have to decide whether you want to force them to take down. If the photos are not still live online, then nothing to lose.

Guy

Guy