MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SnapVillage's Mock Ad Contest - Compensation if image is used in published ad?  (Read 5856 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 08, 2008, 12:36 »
0
I'm concerned about SnapVillage Mock Ad Contest, IF I understand the info in their contest pdf correctly: http://www.snapvillage.com/sv_forms/Mock_Ad_T-shirt_Giveaway_Official_Rules_17-Mar-08.pdf

SnapVillage is having a contest where you create a mock ad using one of their images. First 5,000 entrants get free T-shirt.

HOWEVER,  in the Contest pdf, it states that any mock ad one submits could then be used and modified worldwide for no compensation or notice  - does this include no compensation or notice to the person whose image was used in mock ad?!

Good grief, I wouldn't want to give that away for a free T-shirt. Wouldn't want to use my own image. Wouldn't want anyone to use mine. Wouldn't be fair to use anyone else's image.

For example, if someone used one of my SnapVillage images in mock ad,  that means that ad with my image could be used and modified for free, and I wouldn't have had any say in it. Wouldn't even get a (wow) T-shirt!

IF person whose image is used in mock ad doesn't get compensation/notice if it's then used, people should be warned away from this contest.


« Reply #1 on: April 08, 2008, 13:04 »
0
But presumably it says in the submitter T&C that they can use images for sale on their site to promote the site?

And you would have had a sale - because the designer of the ad would have had to buy your picture at large resolution to use in the competition.

Personally, if my picture was used by an agency that drove many extra buyers to the site, that could only be good, right?  After all, many extra buyers could translate to many extra sales for me!
« Last Edit: April 08, 2008, 13:24 by Seren »

fotoKmyst

« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2008, 13:06 »
0
wow ann,
this is scarier and scarier.
first i read so many complaints about Stock Photo Spot ripping their photographers off, with not even a response to their emails (they say reply within one business day), and no way to delete their photos and/or accounts.
now we get this one.
where do these companies learn their business morals?
without the photographers where would they be?

oh well, perharps like someone who wrote about crappy and dishonest stock agencies being a front for money laundering.

who knows?
heavens, this is enough to discourage any newbie  wishing to get in.

ann,
i hope you get a decent response to allay your fears.
it sure doesn't sound right ... allowing ppl to use your photos without compensation.

or i hope that seren is right.



 :)
« Last Edit: April 08, 2008, 13:08 by fotoKmyst »

« Reply #3 on: April 08, 2008, 13:10 »
0
oops
« Last Edit: April 08, 2008, 13:24 by Seren »

« Reply #4 on: April 08, 2008, 13:18 »
0
I would guess that every site we upload to has a clause in the TOS that they can for free use our pictures to advertise their site.... and the do all the time, making ads, banners etc without compesation to us.

This is no different.  Snapvillage will be using one of our images in their ad... for free, just like all the other companies do.

RT


« Reply #5 on: April 08, 2008, 13:24 »
0
But presumably it says in the submitter T&C that they can use images for sale on their site to promote the site?

I believed this was standard on all stock sites.

To the OP:

I honestly can't see what the problem is with using any of the images uploaded in their adverts, don't you want to sell your images?

Now getting some sort of compensation for the design work is another thing.


« Reply #6 on: April 08, 2008, 13:26 »
0
Yah... I think I'd be pretty happy if one of the agencies used my photo for an ad.

What better advertising for me?

« Reply #7 on: April 08, 2008, 13:54 »
0
I would guess that every site we upload to has a clause in the TOS that they can for free use our pictures to advertise their site.... and the do all the time, making ads, banners etc without compesation to us.

This is no different.  Snapvillage will be using one of our images in their ad... for free, just like all the other companies do.

LuckyOliver buys all images that they use themselves.  Obviously that's a big discount given they keep the majority of the license fee, but at least the contributor is rewarded appropriately. 

This is one of the reasons I like LuckyOliver despite their slow sales for most contributors so far. They do things like this and they don't boast about it.

« Reply #8 on: April 08, 2008, 13:56 »
0
In fairness to SnapVillage, I'm really not just concerned about them and their contest, since it seems that it's standard procedure at a lot of sites.

Any stock agency that uses a contributor's image without compensation and/or credit doesn't seem to be taking the high road. (Color me naive.)


Okay, now back to SnapVillage's contest....

First, any person who creates mock ad doesn't even have to buy photo used in it  The Contest rules state designer can use watermarked version of photo.

If designer had to use OWN photo - which s/he doesn't -  at least then using the photo for free T-shirt is photographer's decision.

Second, it doesn't sound like the person whose photo is used will get any visible credit line if photo is used, even worldwide.  (I hope I'm wrong on this.)  So, having my photo appear w/o any notice it's mine would not be a thrill for me.


On the other hand, an earlier post mentioned that any ad that would drive sales to the site would be good in general for everyone selling photos there. I sincerely respect that person's viewpoint. However, any business like SnapVillage should certainly be able to afford to pay photographer and/or give visible credit line, for use of photo - especially if it's going to be widely distributed, even possibly in a magazine ad for all I know.


LuckyOliver used one of my photos in a blog, and they credited me with a blog sale. Now THAT's the way it should be all over!


P.S.  Since I was composing (and eventually posting) 1st version of this message during time leaf posted above, I wanted to mention I really like how he stressed the positive message about Lucky Oliver. 
« Last Edit: April 08, 2008, 14:07 by ann »

RT


« Reply #9 on: April 08, 2008, 17:51 »
0
Copyright law in the UK and I'd imagine in most countries states that we as photographers (or artists of any nature) have droit moral with basically means we have the right to be credited for any usage of our work.

However if you check the T&C's at the majority of stock sites you'll probably find a waiver of some description in there somewhere, because if they didn't it would effectively mean we could sue for any image we find in use that doesn't give us a credit line, imagine how that would effect a sites sales figures!

Also imagine from a buyers point of view if they had to use credit lines everytime they use an image, I appreciate what you're saying and it would be nice to be compensated or credited for use of our images in sites promotion, but at the end of the day you'll probably find they're within their rights.

It would be interesting to see if LO paid for use of an image if they did any real marketing.


« Reply #10 on: April 08, 2008, 21:59 »
0
corbis ran a photo comp last year (or possibly late 2006?).  Had nice prize money $'000s but  as a condition of entry (entry not winning) the photographer agrees to transfer the full copyright of all accepted images to corbis.

says a lot to me...
« Last Edit: April 08, 2008, 22:02 by clearviewstock »

helix7

« Reply #11 on: April 09, 2008, 00:36 »
0
Most sites include some language in their legal stuff that says they can use our images without compensation or credit. We all agreed to it, so no use complaining about it. Besides, what's the big deal if a microstock site does use your image without pay? You lose a couple bucks on one sale. I doubt many of us would see multiple images hit ads, so it's pretty much  a one-time thing.

Regarding the contest, I think this is something that everyone will have to decide whether to participate in on a personal basis. I entered, because I knew that I could whip up a decent ad in about half an hour, so it's not a huge time commitment. There is a guaranteed payoff, even if it is just a t-shirt, but I happen to like getting my hands on any microstock company swag that I can, so it's worthwhile to me. And if they use my ad, then cool. I'll be happy to see it in print.

Sure this all borders on the dirty term "spec work", something that I'm openly opposed to most of the time. But in some rare cases, I make exceptions if the work is appealing or the payoff is worthwhile to me, even if not monetarily speaking.



« Reply #12 on: April 09, 2008, 00:47 »
0

corbis ran a photo comp last year (or possibly late 2006?).  Had nice prize money $'000s but  as a condition of entry (entry not winning) the photographer agrees to transfer the full copyright of all accepted images to corbis.

says a lot to me...


Some competitions slip that nasty condition into their rules for entry. Nikon did it too, in the UK last year and there was a howl of protest from several professional photographers' organisations. In the end Nikon dropped the condition.

Read the rules carefully folks, and don't go anywhere near a competition that takes all rights to all entries. What's more, warn anyone off any competition you find that does that.

« Reply #13 on: April 09, 2008, 02:08 »
0
Regarding the contest, I think this is something that everyone will have to decide whether to participate in on a personal basis. I entered, because I knew that I could whip up a decent ad in about half an hour, so it's not a huge time commitment. There is a guaranteed payoff, even if it is just a t-shirt, but I happen to like getting my hands on any microstock company swag that I can, so it's worthwhile to me. And if they use my ad, then cool. I'll be happy to see it in print.

I might do too, I like free T-Shirts, and it's gonna be better than the 15 I paid for the iStock one!  My design skills are very severely lacking, so I doubt anything I knocked up would actually be used!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
2852 Views
Last post May 14, 2007, 14:59
by steve-oh
0 Replies
1366 Views
Last post May 15, 2007, 12:07
by steve-oh
17 Replies
2823 Views
Last post July 31, 2013, 14:20
by gostwyck
21 Replies
2836 Views
Last post May 28, 2014, 14:01
by Ariene
2 Replies
2146 Views
Last post September 06, 2017, 16:31
by carolo7

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results