Another 'Photo used without permission' thread...

odd jim

odd jim

Flimsiest Lambresta
Messages
9,209
Name
Jim
Edit My Images
Yes
A couple of weeks back I attended a wedding as a guest for a couple of friends of mine. I only shot happy snaps with my beloved pocket able Sony RX100 rather than anything serious, as a simple record of the day and so I could tag the happy couple in on social media etc. Purely a personal exercise for mine and others enjoyment, as you do. However, another friend of mine alerted me to a post a mutual friend of theirs made on the Toastmaster's FB business page which appeared on their feed, which was a simple congratulatory post on a photo of the couple. Low and behold it was one of my photos, but not linked from my own post. Looking into it further, the Toastmaster has copied and uploaded my photo, which is a photo of the couple cutting the cake stood next to the toastmaster, onto his business page (not personal) and its actually being used on the contact section of his page next to his phone number, which puts it firmly into the commercial / promotional category as far as I am concerned!

I am of two minds what to do. On one hand I am annoyed he has taken my photo and used it for his own purposes with no regards to the image itself, copyright, and the value of images when used in this way which he has used without thought. I am tempted to send him a little message saying that I'm flattered he thought my little compact shot was good enough to promote his business, but would he mind taking it down? Then offering my services to him for a proper shoot where he can buy a set of images :)

...or just leave it as I suffered no loss and its a simple shot taken at a happy event and leave it and save my energy.

The principle of the thing is annoying me though...

I'll add, the couple of course did have a very good pro shooting the day, but he hasn't touched any of her images, so maybe he thinks a guests images are fair game??
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
If it's a personal FB page I normally let it slide but when it's business is when I take a business stance.

Time to send invoice.
Click to expand...
This is exactly my thinking. It's only subject to a small circulation though (only 60 or so people following, but it's a fairly new page) which has held me back, but it shouldn't make a difference IMO if its 60 or 60,000. Of course, its organic so will also grow as time goes on...
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
This is exactly my thinking. It's only subject to a small circulation though (only 60 or so people following, but it's a fairly new page) which has held me back, but it shouldn't make a difference IMO if its 60 or 60,000. Of course, its organic so will also grow as time goes on...
Click to expand...

Send him an invoice for £50 or whatever you decide. Terms are photo licence for 1 year only.

If it's still there next year, send him another invoice.
 
Don't forget to take a screengrab of the pages before you do anything.
Proof is always good so you can pursue payment if he takes the image down.
 
Phil-1 said:
As you said he's a mutual friend. Contact him first point out that photography is not free and would he like to pay for it or remove it.
He might not have realised what he's done.
Click to expand...

He's not a mutual friend, I don't even know him, he was the Toastmaster the bride and groom paid for who works all over the country. A friend of a friend commented on the photo on his page, in which he tagged the bride and groom after he stole and uploaded the photo.
 
Last edited:
kendo1 said:
Don't forget to take a screengrab of the pages before you do anything.
Proof is always good so you can pursue payment if he takes the image down.
Click to expand...

Indeed, done this. Think I'll try the gentle approach, as Phil said he might just not realise what he's done.
 
odd jim said:
He's not a mutual friend, I don't even know him. A friend of a friend commented on the photo on his page, in which he tagged the bride and groom after he stole and uploaded the photo.
Click to expand...

Sorry read it as he was a mutual friend.
I would still approach him in a friendly way. Point out that it's not a done thing. If that get you no way then send an invoice. [emoji106]
 
AFAIK toastmasters are a professional lot and should know about 'business'!

You say he has not linked but copied and uploaded it...........this could be seen as quite savvy on his part as linkage would be more easily detectable/visible. So is he acting deviously by doing that? Bearing in mind surely he would take recognition that a pro tog was there as a business man and as such would be "controlling" his image usages.

IMO yes make your first contact an enquiring type and see where his response guides your further steps.
 
Last edited:
Be sure you stipulate copyright remains with you, the photographer and only licence for his own use of promotion is permitted.

Not that guy will lose copyright by not writing it but better to leave him in no confusion what he is actually paying for.
 
Last edited:
Ok thanks all, I have sent him a polite message pretty much echoing the above. I will update when I get his response!
 
So far, no reply...
 
Well, tonight I received a very odd and terse reply. The highlights of which he states;

"The only photographer I was aware of was a female". (At a wedding? Just one person taking images?)

"Who I supported at no cost to her"

"In future they can bring their own dogs body" (?)

"My contract states the use of my photographs (??) require my permission, however I would not be so petty to demand my images are removed". (I'm assuming he means photos which feature him).

Well there you go. Image removed which he has done, so issue now concluded, but he seems to think I was an assistant to the photographer on the day, going by his remarks. I've explained again I was a friend of the b&g, not part of the photography package but it shouldn't make a difference.

It's clear going by the last segment he sees copyright theft and commercial usage without permission "petty" [emoji853]

But I'm not sure how me asking him to take my photo down (which I have given the b&g anyway) has spoilt their day in any way?

It's sad how disposable people see images these days.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
Well, tonight I received a very odd and terse reply. The highlights of which he states;

"The only photographer I was aware of was a female". (At a wedding? Just one person taking images?)

"Who I supported at no cost to her"

"In future they can bring their own dogs body" (?)

"My contract states the use of my photographs (??) require my permission, however I would not be so petty to demand my images are removed". (I'm assuming he means photos which feature him).

Well there you go. Image removed which he has done, so issue now concluded, but he seems to think I was an assistant to the photographer on the day, going by his remarks. I've explained again I was a friend of the b&g, not part of the photography package but it shouldn't make a difference.

It's clear going by the last segment he sees copyright theft and commercial usage without permission "petty" [emoji853]

But I'm not sure how me asking him to take my photo down (which I have given the b&g anyway) has spoilt their day in any way?

It's sad how disposable people see images these days.
Click to expand...

Perhaps as a profession they need to be informed and educated as to the protocols & rights associated with photographs! http://www.professional-toastmasters dot org/ NB inserted dot for the (.) to avoid the crawlers exposure in a search ;) (hope it works?)

From his reply he does not come across as particularly professional or well mannered :(
 
If he values the image enough he would pay for it.

If he values his time he would have asked for money at the wedding.

He clearly values neither.
 
Box Brownie said:
Perhaps as a profession they need to be informed and educated as to the protocols & rights associated with photographs! http://www.professional-toastmasters dot org/ NB inserted dot for the (.) to avoid the crawlers exposure in a search ;) (hope it works?)

From his reply he does not come across as particularly professional or well mannered :(
Click to expand...

No, not polite at all, even though my message was.
 
Raymond Lin said:
If he values the image enough he would pay for it.

If he values his time he would have asked for money at the wedding.

He clearly values neither.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and it's a shame he thinks he can simply take what he likes. Not even a credit, which actually wouldn't have bothered me if he handled it that way.
 
This on that website

On the day you can expect your Toastmaster to arrive at the venue early for a thorough check of all arrangements; he/she will liaise with caterers, organisers, photography and video teams, entertainers and other professionals involved to ensure all is prepared, and will continue to do so throughout the day, reworking the plan should anything unexpected occur. Throughout the day your Toastmaster will keep a watchful eye and deal discreetly with any matters that require attention.

I have made bold the parts shown.................for someone who is supposed to be a sort of lynch-pin 'wedding reception manager' his reply to you exposes flaws in his actual ability or his capabilities to so manage. I wonder what the paid tog made of him if anything??? A pro would have been polite and engaged in the question of your concerns, not (apparently) belligerent and defensive verging on the insulting. NB here I am surmising your email was enquiring and informative i.e. not demanding ;)

Edit ~ sorry did not refresh so missed your post above before posting.
 
Last edited:
Box Brownie said:
This on that website

On the day you can expect your Toastmaster to arrive at the venue early for a thorough check of all arrangements; he/she will liaise with caterers, organisers, photography and video teams, entertainers and other professionals involved to ensure all is prepared, and will continue to do so throughout the day, reworking the plan should anything unexpected occur. Throughout the day your Toastmaster will keep a watchful eye and deal discreetly with any matters that require attention.

I have made bold the parts shown.................for someone who is supposed to be a sort of lynch-pin 'wedding reception manager' his reply to you exposes flaws in his actual ability or his capabilities to so manage. I wonder what the paid tog made of him if anything??? A pro would have been polite and engaged in the question of your concerns, not (apparently) belligerent and defensive verging on the insulting. NB here I am surmising your email was enquiring and informative i.e. not demanding ;)

Edit ~ sorry did not refresh so missed your post above before posting.
Click to expand...

No it wasn't demanding, I even said he could continue to use it though that of course would be subject to a licence. I outlined the errors in his ways but only by pointing it out, and even acknowledged he might not (but should, though I didn't say that!) have realised the legalities of it.
 
Reading between the lines here I am left with the impression that perhaps this toastmaster was in genuine ignorance. You said yourself that he made no attempt to infringe the paid photographer's copyright. Perhaps he really does not understand that copyright law extends to guest's images too.
 
odd jim said:
Well, tonight I received a very odd and terse reply. The highlights of which he states;

"The only photographer I was aware of was a female". (At a wedding? Just one person taking images?)

"Who I supported at no cost to her"

"In future they can bring their own dogs body" (?)

"My contract states the use of my photographs (??) require my permission, however I would not be so petty to demand my images are removed". (I'm assuming he means photos which feature him).

Well there you go. Image removed which he has done, so issue now concluded, but he seems to think I was an assistant to the photographer on the day, going by his remarks. I've explained again I was a friend of the b&g, not part of the photography package but it shouldn't make a difference.

It's clear going by the last segment he sees copyright theft and commercial usage without permission "petty" [emoji853]

But I'm not sure how me asking him to take my photo down (which I have given the b&g anyway) has spoilt their day in any way?

It's sad how disposable people see images these days.
Click to expand...
Can't you still send him an invoice? He has used your image, even though he's since taken it down. Might teach the cheeky fecker a lesson.
 
odd jim said:
Well, tonight I received a very odd and terse reply. The highlights of which he states;

"The only photographer I was aware of was a female". (At a wedding? Just one person taking images?)
Click to expand...

Hmm! so he believed the image you were asking about and that he used was taken by the pro tog.....................a virtual admission that he knowingly 'grabbed' a pro photograph that would be subject to copyright and licensing control?

odd jim said:
Well, tonight I received a very odd and terse reply. The highlights of which he states;

"Who I supported at no cost to her"

"In future they can bring their own dogs body" (?)
Click to expand...

Er! he is employed by the B&G and the TM website says 'a TM role is help with the smooth running of the event' so how do these two comments "play out" ~ did he get his nose put out by the tog or someone else taking offence at his behaviour......directing them?

odd jim said:
Well, tonight I received a very odd and terse reply. The highlights of which he states;

"My contract states the use of my photographs (??) require my permission, however I would not be so petty to demand my images are removed". (I'm assuming he means photos which feature him).
Click to expand...

Again, his contract is with the B&G and unless they are signing that they will be responsible for overseeing his rights are observed how does his contract over-ride the photographers rights!!!!

For sure I would as suggested the TM pro body need to be educated & educate their members as appropriate.

Edit ~ PS re-reading your OP it would seem the paid tog did not take a similar picture......I wonder why? Or if she did was your image seen as 'easier game' to grab. More grist for the mill to get some educative info to his pro body and by their direction "him".
 
Last edited:
Bobsyeruncle said:
Can't you still send him an invoice? He has used your image, even though he's since taken it down. Might teach the cheeky fecker a lesson.
Click to expand...

I'm tempted!
 
Box Brownie said:
Hmm! so he believed the image you were asking about and that he used was taken by the pro tog.....................a virtual admission that he knowingly 'grabbed' a pro photograph that would be subject to copyright and licensing control?



Er! he is employed by the B&G and the TM website says 'a TM role is help with the smooth running of the event' so how do these two comments "play out" ~ did he get his nose put out by the tog or someone else taking offence at his behaviour......directing them?



Again, his contract is with the B&G and unless they are signing that they will be responsible for overseeing his rights are observed how does his contract over-ride the photographers rights!!!!

For sure I would as suggested the TM pro body need to be educated & educate their members as appropriate.

Edit ~ PS re-reading your OP it would seem the paid tog did not take a similar picture......I wonder why? Or if she did was your image seen as 'easier game' to grab. More grist for the mill to get some educative info to his pro body and by their direction "him".
Click to expand...

Funnily enough the pro did take a similar photo albeit from a slightly different angle as in one of the three frames I shot, you can see the end of her lens hood in two of the shots, and there's a shot on her FB page of the cake cutting.
 
Maybe, and it is just a maybe, he thought he'd used the pro tog's image and said tog had verbally given him permission as a thank you for him helping her during the day? no excuse for him being rude in his correspondence though.
 
PaulF said:
Maybe, and it is just a maybe, he thought he'd used the pro tog's image and said tog had verbally given him permission as a thank you for him helping her during the day? no excuse for him being rude in his correspondence though.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is the case TBH. But he doesn't need a thank you, part of his paid duties is to help the photographer, and I doubt he was cheap ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top