The reason it showed "no delivery" is that you sent it from the wrong address.
There's a difference between what I sent to the "Jerque" and what ALMS claims. The difference is actually twofold. First, when they issue credentials, it's implied that they'll get their kickback one way or the other: either from a big media outlet like Sports Illustrated or SpeedTV OR they have their "pet" photographers who are either working directly for ALMS or are under contract to them and then ALMS gets a share or just pays a salary. They don't want anyone making money without getting their cut. That's the "implied consent" part. I've checked this out with other photographers who work with different sanctioning bodies...and I'm gonna check on it further with Bret Kepner who covers drag racing for Fox AND runs his own photo web site: http://www.racingperspectives.com/cgi-bin/store/imageFolio.cgi?direct=Bret_Kepner_Photos
I met him when I was in Portland earlier this year. He's a real good dude.The second difference between the situation I was in and shooting at the track is also twofold. First, where I was shooting was from a place "visible or accessible to the public" and the fact that the car could not be directly connected to its owner by viewing the photo. Neither one of those points can be made as a credentialed photographer shooting at Miller's. So my argument wouldn't hold water with them.
However, I got thinking about this. We've given Miller's TONS of free publicity. I've got a blurb on the front page of the ChevyAsylum website thanking John Gardner for all his help PLUS a link to the Miller site. I figure that if they're gonna cut us off from the opportunity to shoot events there because of the actions of others, then I'd let them know that the publicity and goodwill that I've given them comes to a screeching halt and will be replaced with VERY negative publicity all over the internet.
Now I don't want to go against ALMS nor Grand-Am and boy, do I ever see the incestuous relationship with JC France...I'm gonna digress a moment here and list this website: http://blogs.courant.com/autoracing/2010/04/jc-france-proves-nascars-drug.html which seems to cover the issue pretty clearly. What's not said is how many of NASCAR's lawyers were involved in finding and convincing the judge of the "technicality" which wouldn't have been considered if the average Joe had been accused. This is absolutely rotten to the core. Now every racer is gonna wonder if every faux pas made by JC (who isn't a very skilled driver, anyway) is caused by having his mind addled with drugs. I can just see him takin Max Angelelli out as he's being lapped and Angelelli shooting his mouth off big time about gettin crashed out by somebody who's probably on crack. I've wondered about some drivers who run hot and cold...and ask myself, "are they using drugs such as stimulants when they're doing real well, but on the ragged edge or are they hung over as hell or jonesin' when they claim to have the flu or have a real lousy run and blame it on the car?" The term, "bottle flu" has been around for a long time as a reason for poor employee performance. I should know, I used that excuse as well as a million other ones.
Ok. Back on track, I don't wanna try to do the kinds of things that will land my ass in hot water. It's not worth the fight, and I'm not up for it emotionally and physically. However, I WILL fight tooth and nail to see that we don't get shit on because of some idiot that got credentialed on some phony application and then screws everybody over. I wonder if this had anything to do with the photographer's stand along the front straight at the Ferrari Challenge race. You know, the one we weren't allowed on...and the fact that we weren't allowed to shoot for more than 20 minutes on the front straight...even in practice. According to the heavy-handed "official" (who also kicked Jeromy Camp outta there, if I recall correctly) they were just following "Grand-Am's rules." I didn't realize until I just did some digging that the Challenge is sanctioned by Grand-Am (hence NASCAR) and if what I've heard from Larry about photographers gettin banned for putting an elbow over the fence is accurate, then maybe things start to come clear. If that's the case, I might just decide that I don't want to play anymore. I made that decision about Rocky Mountain Raceway 13 years ago and haven't been back since. It was when it stopped being enjoyable that I had to ask myself, "is it worth it?" The answer was, "no." And I don't feel like I've missed anything.
Stuff to think about, I spose. r Sent from my Dreadnought using that barely tolerable Thunderbird email program On 5/12/2010 11:57 AM, humminboid@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
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 $$$ it would take to even answer the lawsuit, let alone put them back in their place. Soooo...it continues.Makes me glad I'm just an amatchoor hacker. C From: "Larry Knight" carpixguy@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:carpixguy@xxxxxxxxx> To: ratpack@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 9:45:30 AM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain Subject: [ratpack] Selling PicsYears ago, before I was "professional" (OK, that's a stretch), I was at Miller for one of the first events, and heard them make an announcement over the P/A about not being able to sell your pictures and they are only for personal use. I was thinking about putting together a calendar for sale, and didn't know much about this little problem of selling pics at a sanctioned event. So I called the ALMS people in Atlanta to ask about the rules and boy did I strike a nerve. They told me that they had a team of 8 people who do nothing but surf the web looking for people who are selling pics of any of "their" cars or anything with their logo on it (how do I get that job). If they found someone they would send them kind of a "Law suite in a packet" and not so politely ask for $5000 for you having violated their rules. If you declined they would then file suite in Atlanta, raise the $$ 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/) <http://photogpimages.com/%29%C2%A0> 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
