Image in local paper - without my permission, sort of...

Andrew, I understand your point of view. My argument is going with the OP's original critera he submitted the image and that the original terms of use were not followed. It really depends on what the person wants from their photography and his/her long term future/plans.

Giving out free can work like you pointed out and it can also backfire. You may be lucky in this regards but I know many togs that have done this and got nothing out of it or when asked the next time for payment get the cold shoulder. I too have managed to get alot published but by sticking to my guns so too speak and now have client accounts.

I would however point folk to this months Professional photographer mag where there is a very good piece on this exact topic.
 
Yes, it is the Salisbury Journal... As they did get the credit to me correct too :clap:

The editor is on holiday today. I will follow it up with him first thing Monday. I have drawn his attention to the article with my picture published and that there are other pictures in the same article by their own photographers. I said I'm sure they were paid, so I expect to be also. Nothing heavy, just fair.

Failing that, it will have to be the goldfish as ashers mentioned...

I go to many events around the area, so would be happy to send other photos in for them to be published.. but not for free. :D
 
After a bit of chasing I'm going to get £11 for the picture... Well its better than nowt (y)
My details have also been passed onto the Chief Photographer :wave:

Now all I have to do is draw up an invoice... If anyone has a sample I'd appreciate it.

And, thanks to everyone for the advice.
 
Good news that they're prepared to make a payment. However, it irritates me that newspapers will not think twice about stealing images and then paying later if they have to. When this has happened to me, I have sent an invoice detailing my terms and my payment requirements. If they don't like it, then tough, as they broke the law.

Understandably in this case it's a little different, as you did make a submission, abeit to a different section of the newspaper. On principle though I think it's important to claim for fees if photos are used without permission. Whilst there's nothing wrong with submitting images for free to a paper, if they're used without permission then it's good to press for payment because otherwise they'll think they can get away with it. Downside of that is that pro photographers will suffer.

Or put another way, if a paper uses one of my pictures without permission, I take offence. The satisfaction of having something in print is not close to compensating me for this.
 
David Hoffman advises refusing to haggle and reminding them that "I cannot accept that copyright infringement can ever be a cheaper route to publication than licenced use."

The sum claimed (in most cases, though not this) should be compensation for infringement: you are not granting them a licence.

There's no contract, so the invoice is meaningless really, and could be rejected. But then the infringer risks legal action. If that goes ahead, unless it's secondary infringement, any award would be only for a reasonable amount, so the amount claimed should be based on previous work or published rates, but you may as well go for a 50 percent uplift.
 
Ian T said:
Good news that they're prepared to make a payment. However, it irritates me that newspapers will not think twice about stealing images and then paying later if they have to. When this has happened to me, I have sent an invoice detailing my terms and my payment requirements. If they don't like it, then tough, as they broke the law.
Click to expand...

Perhaps a good argument for when the paper starts saying how much they pay is to ask if you can book an advert using the same ethos ;)
 
(Ha ha, pxl8, you have a point there)

Hoffman's quote is interesting, and very apt. Of course he's right - copyright infringement should not be cheaper/equal, otherwise papers would (but probably do anyway) think: we can either pay £x, or infringe copyright and then get made to pay £x if caught.

I've just sent off an invoice for unlicensed use of two images, and I invoiced them for a fee which comfortably covers the 'going rate' and then a little more.
 
-RV- said:
After a bit of chasing I'm going to get £11 for the picture... Well its better than nowt (y)
My details have also been passed onto the Chief Photographer :wave:

Now all I have to do is draw up an invoice... If anyone has a sample I'd appreciate it.

And, thanks to everyone for the advice.
Click to expand...

I don't know your circumstances but I would have thought if you're invoicing a business that would leave you open to all sorts of tax implications as in effect you're running a business yourself.

I know the rules on self employment state you have to notify Inland revenue within 3 months of commencement of said business.
 
Photography is a hobby at the moment, so I don't have a company registered.

Even so, I should still be able to send them an invoice of some sort to be paid for my work.

I have no idea what the procedures are relating to tax... Anyone got any advice ?
 
With most of these things, isn't there small print when you submit your photos saying you hand over all copyright etc?
 
Adam said:
With most of these things, isn't there small print when you submit your photos saying you hand over all copyright etc?
Click to expand...
No, there is nothing about this, I checked beforehand.
 
If its likely to be a regular thing you'll need to think twice. I wouldn't worry about a single £ 11 fee.

Accounts just want something to allocate a payment against, so put your name and address, newspapers name and address, name of the image and when it was used, and the fee and who it was agreed with.
 
-RV- said:
Photography is a hobby at the moment, so I don't have a company registered.

Even so, I should still be able to send them an invoice of some sort to be paid for my work.

I have no idea what the procedures are relating to tax... Anyone got any advice ?
Click to expand...

Technically you should register as self-employed and then each year you'll get a tax return to fill out. In reality I wouldn't bother. You could claim all sorts of expenses such as your equipment, electricity, postage, phone, etc. and end up getting a rebate from your PAYE contributions but is it worth the hassle? The tax man is hardly likely to bother when you're basically entitled to claim back a few quid from him.
 
In the Terms & Conditions for the website of my local paper it states (in part):

If you submit content to the Publisher (including without limitation any text, photograph, graphics, video or audio) , you grant the Publisher a licence to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, create derivative works from, distribute and display in public that content in any form and media on or in connection with the Site, at no cost to us and for as long as we require and you warrant that you own or have rights to the intellectual property in such content and have the right to grant this licence. You waive any moral rights in your contribution. You will indemnify us and keep us indemnified from and against all costs, claims, damages and expenses made against or incurred by us as a result of a third party alleging that the use of such content by us infringes the intellectual property rights of a third party.

I don't know if they send a printed copy to everyone whose work they intend publishing.
 
Thanks for the advice. I'm already in full employment this is just a hobby and a one-off payment.

If I manage to sell more images, I will look into it further.
 
I raised the one off sideline payment issue with the IR last year. I no longer work in IT but an old customer rang me up desperate for a small piece of work on a topic I knew well but their incumbent supplier wanted to charge £3000 for.

I billed them £250 and declared it as extra income on my tax return, which is what the IR told me to do. They said that if it was goinf to be regular then reopen the company or something, but for a smallish one off the admin overhead for them wasnt worth it.

For £11 I wouldn't even mention it - I think there is some rule on 'de minimis' (sorry my latin isn't to hot) that trivial amounts can be ignored.
 
You did that for £250?!! Yes, sure, you can declare it on your tax return, but really, do you think you're going to get in trouble for a few hundred quid that they'll never know about? I'm not saying it's a trivial amount, but the IR don't have spies in your house. Sure, if you were regularly receiving payments you'd register, but even three, four, five payments of a few hundred quid I personally wouldn't.
 
The inland have too few staff and they have better things to spend their days doing than chasing £11 or even £250 for that matter.
 
Photography may be your hobby but it's not mine - it's my job. Everytime an amateur gives away pictures to the local press - or anywhere else - it makes it more and more difficult for pros to get appropriate payment - and bylines don't put food on the table. They thought your pic was worth publishing (and it is) so you deserve payment. PLEASE follow this up - any way you think appropriate - but get paid at the end of the day! Local press don't pay a lot for stuff like this - but they should pay. Don't be put off by promises of work in the future - it never comes. Once you start doing stuff for free you're stuck with it. Good luck!
 
Ian T said:
You did that for £250?!! Yes, sure, you can declare it on your tax return, but really, do you think you're going to get in trouble for a few hundred quid that they'll never know about? I'm not saying it's a trivial amount, but the IR don't have spies in your house. Sure, if you were regularly receiving payments you'd register, but even three, four, five payments of a few hundred quid I personally wouldn't.
Click to expand...

The people who paid the invoice were a government department and we had to have a little conversation to get them to pay a non-vat registered individual.
Not knowing how they followed that up, safe is better than sorry.
 
awp said:
Photography may be your hobby but it's not mine - it's my job. Everytime an amateur gives away pictures to the local press - or anywhere else - it makes it more and more difficult for pros to get appropriate payment - and bylines don't put food on the table. They thought your pic was worth publishing (and it is) so you deserve payment. PLEASE follow this up - any way you think appropriate - but get paid at the end of the day! Local press don't pay a lot for stuff like this - but they should pay. Don't be put off by promises of work in the future - it never comes. Once you start doing stuff for free you're stuck with it. Good luck!
Click to expand...
YES! This is one of my key points. Although it's not my job, in the few situations where I've had work stolen, I've felt a moral obligation to guys like yourself. I think it's important to do this, as otherwise freelancers loose a little ground each time.

So, even if you're not that bothered, and are happy seeing your work in print, push for compensation - you owe it to the artform!
 
Thanks Ian.

BTW - the NUJ recommendation for unauthorised use is TWICE the going rate! :)
You'd be surprised at the high profile people/companies I've caught using my work without permission. They won't do it again though! :)
 
Ian T said:
You did that for £250?!! Yes, sure, you can declare it on your tax return, but really, do you think you're going to get in trouble for a few hundred quid that they'll never know about? I'm not saying it's a trivial amount, but the IR don't have spies in your house. Sure, if you were regularly receiving payments you'd register, but even three, four, five payments of a few hundred quid I personally wouldn't.
Click to expand...

I have been suppling pics to a magazine since 2005 and get paid on average £120 per month.
In 2006 I recieved a demand for tax, luckily I had all reciepts for gear/travel etc, I handed them all to a accountant who in turn sent my tax return to the IR, it was estimated I should have recieved a rebate of around £300.
When I spoke to them and explained that this will be a regular thing they decided to put it down as a hobby, bearing in mind my travel expenses would out do any money I earned on a yearly basis.
Always say you don't know!!
 
Like I said, regular income, fair enough. And you shouldn't need an accountant if it's ongoing - visit www.businesslink.gov.uk and you'll find some useful information on dealing with sole trader tax returns yourself. And I think I'm right in saying you can operate as a 'part-time sole-trader' if you're already in full-time employment (and on a PAYE system) elsewhere.

But for the occasional one-off payment, be it £11, £250 or even £500, I certainly wouldn't inform the Inland Revenue. They get enough as it is.
 
awp said:
Photography may be your hobby but it's not mine - it's my job. Everytime an amateur gives away pictures to the local press - or anywhere else - it makes it more and more difficult for pros to get appropriate payment - and bylines don't put food on the table. They thought your pic was worth publishing (and it is) so you deserve payment. PLEASE follow this up - any way you think appropriate - but get paid at the end of the day! Local press don't pay a lot for stuff like this - but they should pay. Don't be put off by promises of work in the future - it never comes. Once you start doing stuff for free you're stuck with it. Good luck!
Click to expand...

I totally agree and to be honest its the real reason I chased them up. The article had 3 other pictures in it that were by professionals.

Saying that though I know by accepting the £11 it is probably less than they would have paid a professional, but I thought something is better than nothing and didn't want to get heavy handed.

I don't think the IR need to know about £11 either...
 
Fair enough, but it's never a bad idea to make a publication pay an amount that is above their usual fee. For example, I have helped people in the past claim fees, and many times the paper will initially turn down what's been demanded and offer the 'going rate'. It's tempting to accept this and avoid any 'fuss' as it's the easiest option. However, pretty much ten times out of ten, the paper is doing this because they know they'll lose if they contest it.

So my advice is always to push for a fee which makes the old fiasco more than worthwhile, and then dig your heals in. Myself, I'm a bit stubborn at the best of times, and will do it to make a point more than anything!!
 
Yup, next time (if there is one) I'll be more prepared !
 
That's why I would recommend you to go after a specific payment value; don't haggle; don't feel you need to apologise in any way for your work; and have a business account for the payment. All combined, they should get the idea you know what you're doing.
 
YES! This is one of my key points. Although it's not my job, in the few situations where I've had work stolen, I've felt a moral obligation to guys like yourself. I think it's important to do this, as otherwise freelancers loose a little ground each time.

So, even if you're not that bothered, and are happy seeing your work in print, push for compensation - you owe it to the artform!
Click to expand...

IanT....its very refreshing to read that on a forum these days.(y) I salute you...

Iain
 
No worries!

Back in January last year I had nine photos stolen by a Trinity Mirror Group paper. I was discussing it with a local photo journalist over a pint, and although I'd already decided to press for payment (I don't like being taken for a ride, plus it was a good way of justifying a new lens or two), he really made it clear just how important to fellow photographers such as himself it was that I really dig my heals in and persist until they settle (which they did).

So I'm a strong believer that not only should you follow these things up, but that you should decide your terms and not give a single inch. And I think the most important thing to remember is that the law is on your side, and that you shouldn't be put off by the fact that you're making demands from a big organisation.

As a sidenote here, I've sent a few invoices and wordy letters myself, and helped others, including dealing with some (frankly quite lame) replies from papers trying to get off the hook. If any amateurs (that's what I am - I'm guessing the pro's have their own ways of dealing with non/late payment) don't know where to start with this, then feel free to PM me if you need help.
 
Well, for what its worth, I finally received my cheque in the post yesterday...

Next time (if there is one), I will push for more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top