[ratpack] Re: Selling Pics
- From: humminboid@xxxxxxxxxxx
- To: ratpack@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 17:57:08 +0000 (UTC)
Hmmmm...freelists is reporting no delivery.
All this just to keep some paying customer/dedicated photog from selling an
excellent photo he/she took! In my opinion, it would be a hard thing for the
"big guns" to successfully prosecute someone for selling one of his pixes, as
in the excellent missive Ray sent to the Jerque.
But, the big organizations do have chickenthief attorneys on a leash, and most
of us can't afford the $$$ it would take to even answer the lawsuit, let
alone put them back in their place. Soooo...it continues.
Makes me glad I'm just an amatchoor hacker. C
From: "Larry Knight" carpixguy@xxxxxxxxx
To: ratpack@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 9:45:30 AM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain
Subject: [ratpack] Selling Pics
Years ago, before I was "professional" (OK, that's a stretch), I was at Miller
for one of the first events, and heard them make an announcement over the P/A
about not being able to sell your pictures and they are only for personal use.
I was thinking about putting together a calendar for sale, and didn't know much
about this little problem of selling pics at a sanctioned event. So I called
the ALMS people in Atlanta to ask about the rules and boy did I strike a nerve.
They told me that they had a team of 8 people who do nothing but surf the web
looking for people who are selling pics of any of "their" cars or anything with
their logo on it (how do I get that job). If they found someone they would send
them kind of a "Law suite in a packet" and not so politely ask for $5000 for
you having violated their rules. If you declined they would then file suite in
Atlanta, raise the $$ amount and you would then get to plan your next vacation
to Atlanta to defend yourself in court. Not sure how much of that they actually
do, but it certainly caused me to change my underwear not to mention my
calendar plans!!
So it is interesting if it was a Grand Am event photo, that they would get the
track involved. Does the track have a responsibility to police photographers
work for sanctioned events? Has Grand Am threatened the track? What about
spectators, how can you possibly deal with that. It would be interesting to
know how all the behind the scenes, upper level procedures really work with the
different series.
Grand Am has always been a little different. Anybody remember last year when
J.C. France, a Grand Am driver and nephew of Bill France Jr./ Nascar Royal
Family, got busted for possession of ccocaine and driving under the
influence and then had his racing license taken away by Grand Am? Well they
gave it back to him because the courts determined that the arresting officer
didn't follow some procedure. Oh, he still uses cocaine, and was caught driving
while under the influence of cocaine. But because you are a member of the Royal
Family, we will reinstate your ability to drive a race care while still under
the influence of cocaine because the cop used an "and" instead of an "or" in
his little arresting speach. Legally this is an absolute and I don't disagree
at all, but to reinstate your right to drive a race car, when in reality you
are a cocaine user............. not so sure that is a great idea.
I know, I know, Innocent until proven guilty and due process and stuff and I
would want the same reinstatement were it me, but I doubt that the FIA would
ever reinstate a driver found with cocaine and driving. And NO, I am not saying
the FIA has their act together better than Nascar/Grand Am.
OK my point being (whew, after all that there is actually a point) Maybe Grand
Am and their "Feudal Lords and Peasants" view of the world is heavy handing
Miller Motor Sports Park to correct a photog that stepped over the line. Just a
thought (a very long thought)
Has anyone ever been out to Jeremy Henry's site? ( http://photogpimages.com/)
He has pictures of all the major sanctioned events. On his site there is a cart
you can add pics to for purchase. On his ALMS stuff you can request a quote to
buy, which I would bet he would come back and say can't sell you this (the
quote function is probably built into the software, and shows up on all pics
regardless). But would Grand Am be picky enough to say, you are offering pics
for sale on your site and our pics are on your site and therefore..... you are
in violation????? Don't know just some thoughts. Some where on my site I say
e-mail me if you are interested in any pics. Then some of my galleries say not
for sale and some say nothing, am I in violation.
Sorry, I go on to long. Just wondering how all this works and why we all could
have to suffer over a technicality or a vengeful sanctioning body.
Larr
Other related posts:
