FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

very unprofessinal wedding email

Page  <12
Author
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14340
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 August 2017 at 15:46
Originally posted by momech momech wrote:

There's a news story here in Texas ...

I read some of the details. Astonishing. There's definitely a difference between public complaining and malicious defamation.

The plaintiff will probably only get about 30-40% of the settlement with the rest going to her lawyers. The defendants might appeal the verdict; but if they lose that too, they'll owe even more. I'm sure they wake up every day regretting that attempt to save $125 on their multi-thousand-dollar wedding.
 



Back to Top
artuk View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 06 July 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 3751
Post Options Post Options   Quote artuk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 August 2017 at 17:20
Originally posted by 4paul 4paul wrote:

So there's a thread with a bad wedding photog and his horrible emails that popped up on petapixel:

https://petapixel.com/2017/07/31/time-said-f-no-hotels-advertising-opportunity/#disqus_thread

The comments are about along the lines of my reaction, wondering what you all think about the article, before you read the comments, and after you read the comments.

I was appalled by the guy when I read it the first time, after reading the comments I know he is a monumental idiot ...

I haven't made it all the way through the comments, but I wonder what you think of the Trade for Services idea; I personally think the guy was douche-y for asking for "comp" (COMPlimentary = free) rooms instead of payment. His first email should have specified his usual fee, and added a sentence about "since I like shooting weddings at Sheraton hotels I might be inclined to reduce the fee", but even then I think it is morally wrong - the whole point of the article and comments in favor of the article is that photographers are disrespected and don't get paid ... so asking for a free room reinforces the idea that photographers don't want to be paid, just give them a beer and a hotel room and they will shut up.

Also, legalistically, I wonder if shooting wedding photos on Sheraton property is legal ... I don't want to open that can of worms, but pro wedding photogs what do you think? Couldn't Sheraton sue THE PHOTOGRAPHER for taking pictures "for profit" on their private property without sharing revenue?

I don't like this person or his attitude ... the only thing I can hope is that the whole thing is a fabrication by petapixel to get people to click on their silly website ....


I read the story a few days ago. As someone who shoots sports events and had my photos used without permission on companies social media, I had some sympathy for the story. The *feeling* was that someone at Sheraton were trying to get file sizes suitable for publication, without an expectation that they might have to pay.

However, I do agree that the tone of the article and the photographers response changed tone - initially wanting a credit for free publicity, then asking for an indirect form of payment. In my opinion, he should have immediately responded with a question about payment or given an indication of rates and charges. The fact that the issue of payment emerged after an initial conversation about credit seems strange - and I agree with some comments that he ended up giving the wrong person a hard time in his final response.

However, I do agree with the sentiment that companies who want to use images must realise that photography isn't free. I try not to be too precious about photography I share on social media, but I get very annoyed when companies think it's ok for my photos to be used on their social media, or individuals think it's ok to edit images on their phones and then repost them without link or credit.
Art
Back to Top
artuk View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 06 July 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 3751
Post Options Post Options   Quote artuk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 August 2017 at 17:26
Originally posted by MarsCS MarsCS wrote:

I am not a professional photographer, but I find a few issues with this.

Is it not a copyright violation to use a photographers photos for commercial purposes regardless of resolution without a photographers permission?
Don't a wedding photographers photos still fall under his/her copyright unless the contract with the couple states otherwise?
Don't most photographers require compensation for the commercial use of their photos?
Shouldn't anyone, including interns, directors of some sort, etc.. working on advertising for a large corporation know this?



Yes, it is a breach of copyright to use a photograph without permission and/or payment, unless the image was acquired royalty free.

Yes, my understanding would be that it depends on the type of contract between the photographer and the bride and groom - sometimes it may grant a license to use, rather than ownership of the copyright. A contract may restrict certain types of use.

Yes, my expectation would be that photographers (professional, freelance or amateur) would expect a payment for a photo to be used by another person or organisation, unless they grant and license use for free.

You might think that people working in marketing and publicity departments might know this - but then I've worked on offices where employees think anything they can see and download off the internet is ok for them to use.
Art
Back to Top
stiuskr View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Joined: 01 September 2006
Country: United States
Location: West Virginia
Status: Offline
Posts: 11386
Post Options Post Options   Quote stiuskr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 August 2017 at 17:51
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by momech momech wrote:

There's a news story here in Texas ...

I read some of the details. Astonishing. There's definitely a difference between public complaining and malicious defamation.

The plaintiff will probably only get about 30-40% of the settlement with the rest going to her lawyers. The defendants might appeal the verdict; but if they lose that too, they'll owe even more. I'm sure they wake up every day regretting that attempt to save $125 on their multi-thousand-dollar wedding.


I was involved in a personal injury lawsuit in Texas in '92, unless it's changed the lawyers cut is at least 30% but no more than 40%, and then I had to pay for the legal experts and also pay back Workmens Comp for the money they paid out to me. In the end I got a little more than 50% of the settlement after the law firm took their 40%.
Rob Suits Jr.
a99M2 a99 a77 a700 KM7D|Min24/2.8 Min35/2 So50/1.4 So50/2.8 Min85/1.4G Tam90/2.8 Tam180/3.5|Tam17-50 CZ24-70G2 KM28-75D So70-200G1 So70-300G So70-400G1| SonyF60 AD200R2
Back to Top
pakodominguez View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 27 August 2007
Country: United States
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Posts: 597
Post Options Post Options   Quote pakodominguez Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 August 2017 at 19:16
Originally posted by artuk artuk wrote:


However, I do agree with the sentiment that companies who want to use images must realise that photography isn't free. I try not to be too precious about photography I share on social media, but I get very annoyed when companies think it's ok for my photos to be used on their social media, or individuals think it's ok to edit images on their phones and then repost them without link or credit.

Voila
-------------------

Pako Dominguez
www.pakodominguez.photo/blog
Back to Top
artuk View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 06 July 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 3751
Post Options Post Options   Quote artuk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 August 2017 at 22:32
Originally posted by pakodominguez pakodominguez wrote:

Originally posted by artuk artuk wrote:


However, I do agree with the sentiment that companies who want to use images must realise that photography isn't free. I try not to be too precious about photography I share on social media, but I get very annoyed when companies think it's ok for my photos to be used on their social media, or individuals think it's ok to edit images on their phones and then repost them without link or credit.

Voila


Sorry I have no idea what you are agreeing with or what your point is?
Art
 



Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Dyxum Community > Photography as a Business Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.070 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.