Is this OK?

Superior Shine

Superior Shine

New member
In the June 2005 issue of Carwashing & detailing magazine Mr. Abraham wrote an article, "How to generate more revenue".



I have yet to read it but on page 101 of his article there is a picture of my van next to one of my clients 745IL. The business name on the side of my van has been whited out.



Here is my copy of the picture....







That same picture is in a write up I did on the detail for the Meguiars forum here ...







So my question/thought is are pictures posted on the net free game for anyone to use?



I did email one of these carwash / detail magazines a few pics of this car over a year ago to use in a story. I am not sure this picture was one of them.



I never gave permission to anyone to use my pictures in any way after that story.





I am sure everybody associated with the magazine and the article gets compensation in one way or another. And I being the person responsible for the picture didn't even get credit for it. Please don’t let this post lead you to believe I am angry or anything like that. It just doesn’t feel right.



Am I being a cry baby? How would you feel in my shoes? Thanks
 
I would have expected a ...hey can I use this... out of the person using the picture.

I dont think you are being a crybaby, it is your property they used without asking.
 
DavidB was highly upset recently when another website used one of his pictures, which I think was from the car car guide. Whatever your viewpoint on whether all the intellectual property stuff has gone too far or not far enough, that picture is your property, and as long as you can prove that, the magazine has done you wrong. (Unless of course, your wording, when you sent the picture, was not as closed-ended as you remember. If you said "you have my permission to use that picture", then they have rights to it forever)



Do you know that if I read an article in that magazine, and photocopy one page and give it to a friend, I have done something illegal--that friend was supposed to buy the magazine himself, or I was supposed to lend him mine or tear the page out.



Anyway, if you really think they used it without your permission, call them on it. At the very least you should get an apology and a free subscription, maybe they will shoot you a few bucks, too.
 
You have a right to be upset. To use a hijacked photo in a commercial magazine is just plain wrong. You should contact them and relate your feelings to them. Maybe it will prevent them from stealing others' work, for their own gain, in the future.



By the way, you did a superb job on that 745i detail! Amazing results!
 
Unless they cited where and when they got the picture from, it is wrong.:nono



Let's say you-Superior Shine- wrote a big article on how to use a rotary polisher and posted it on a forum.

Then Mr. Abraham comes along uses the article in is magazine and signes his name at the end.



The fact is no matter where you get the "work" whether it be an article, picture, song, poem, whatever - credit must be given to it's creator.



I'm no damn expert, but Kick some A$$ Superior Shine!
 
Superior Shine said:
So my question/thought is are pictures posted on the net free game for anyone to use?
Click to expand...



Absolutely not! Unless you specifically give up your rights, then someone is not allowed to use your pictures as they see fit. Professional journalists should be especially aware of this.



http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter6/index.html



Even giving you credit would not be enough to qualify under fairuse.



http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-b.html#5
 
There are two issues in play here... As a photographer, I'm quite familiar with this:

1) copyright and ownership of the photograph - you own the copyright and rights to the photograph, even if you haven't registered it with the US Copyright Office (though if you wish to pursue legal recourse, aside from a cease and desist letter, this is a prerequisite). It can not be used without your permission. Also covered under copyright is modification of the work - they don't have any right to use it, modified or not.



2) Property Rights. Even if they took the photo themselves, they would need to get a property release from you to use it in any sort of advertising or promotional work. It is YOUR property and even if photographed in a public arena, a signed property release is required.



#2 does not necessarily apply if the image is used in an editorial fashion, but #1 still does.



Good luck with it.



edit: by the way, a magazine such as this would likely pay between $35-100/image for use at 1/2 page or smaller. If it's used larger, for a cover shot or full-page image, expect much more. I've had multiple photos published in mulitple issues Grassroots Motorsports and various local papers and their freelance rate is in that range.
 
Joe,



The phone number and website is visible in both links so I had to remove them. Just go back and delete them on the van and re-post. Thanks.
 
I just checked my copy , I can tell its your van but if you didn't say anything about I wouldn't be able to tell .



If this picture was one of the pictures you allowed the Mag to use last year by doing so you gave them permission to use it when ever they see fit to use it .



Now if someone stole that picture from your site or another site that you used it on then no they can't just steal it and use it . Thats why at the bottom of ever web site there's a copyright quote . All the contents of the web site are copyright protected .



A good way to protect your pictures is to brand them with your website . It looks bad and takes away from the picture but it does what you intend it to do , keep people from stealing your pics. Don't just put your domain name in a corner , place it on the image or behind it as a watermark. Good luck
 
I just looked at mine too, and it is definatly your van. Half of your logo is visible. I would definatly be pretty pissed off. They put up a great picture of a car, and white out your contact info that would give you credit for the detail job. At the very least, they could have left the contact stuff on it.



I would make a phone call to the editor of the magazine, and kick up some dust.
 
Rollman said:
If this picture was one of the pictures you allowed the Mag to use last year by doing so you gave them permission to use it when ever they see fit to use it.
Click to expand...



Not usually, but it depends on the contract. By allowing them to use it, that doesn't mean it's their property. The photographer still owns the rights, unless the rights were sold as part of the agreement - it's not stock photography (where, even then a buy-out is not usual). This is why it pays to have a usage contract and something like a one-time use stated explicitly (most freelance photos are used as such).



Again, good luck with it.
 
Joe,



I was bummed with this issue because I wrote an article that was to be in there and it didn't make the cut, I guess.

I would think you own the pic and unless you give permission, someone should shoot you a call very soon to apologize.

You can't use an artists song in a commercial without permission and I think the same rule applys with pictures and print media.

Let us know what happens.



Rob R
 
It is a huge violation of journalistic standards (I took journalism for one semester) to modify a photograph for publication for any reason other than enhancing colour/clarity/sharpness/removing dust marks/burnt pixels etc. There have been numerous instances of publications such as National Geographic, Time, and other big players firing senior photographers/photo editors and appologizing to their readers for any discovered instance of photo editing.



In one case, a photo editor for National Geographic edited a photo of the pyramids so that three of them would appear closer together, so that they might fit on the cover photo. There was a huge stink over it when tourists compared the cover photo to their own photos and found the discrepency.



In another case, a photographer had the perfect shot of a famous individual (I forget whom), but unfortunately the man's fly was undone. He edited the photo to repair this issue, and no one ever found out, until he admitted it years later while making a speach to a group of student journalists. What followed was an overwhelming silence and then several students pointed out that what he did was basically forbidden by modern journalistic standards, no matter how good his intent.



The reason photos used for publication should never be edited, even in the case of the undone zipper, is that the photo is then portraying a viewpoint or image that NEVER EXISTED. A photo that portrays something that no one has or could ever see is a lie. This is akin to inventing a quote or scenario. If a magazine ever published a photo that included my logo, and edited it out, I would make a huge deal out of it. :rules:
 
I decided to drop it. No damage was done to me. It just didn't pass the sniff test on their part. Here is the reply I recieved from the magazine on another auto detailing forum-





Author: Kevin Hart

Date: 06-03-05 10:40



Hi everyone,

This is Kevin Hart, Publisher of Professional Carwashing & Detailing magazine. I just wanted to take a second to weigh in and confirm what you probably all already suspect -- Bud Abraham had nothing to do with the photo selection you are all discussing.



Bud typically hands us a finished article in word-processor format, and we pretty much take it from there. Regarding photo selection, our editors typically like to place photos of successful detailers and carwash operators within articles, as it is encouraging to our readership. We worked with Jose on an article a year ago about a job he did color sanding water spots from the finish of a new Ford Focus. He clearly knew what he was doing and sent us some very professional photos.



As with many publications, when someone sends us photos they typically become house or 'stock' photos. Most people in this industry love having their businesses shown in the magazine, and in the 7 years I have been with PC&D, this is the first this has come up. However, I can understand how you feel and we will be sensitive to this going forward.



Thanks again for the feedback and I'm glad that you all are reading the magazine. If you ever have any ideas, always feel free to contact me personally at khart@carwash.com.



Thanks and best wishes,

Kevin Hart

Publisher

Professional Carwashing & Detailing







Stinks doesn't it?? But like I said no biggie so I moved on. Thanks for your input.
 
Most people in this industry love having their businesses shown in the magazine
Click to expand...



Yes, this is the upside, and sounds like a good deal to me.



BUT, in your case, they whited out your contact info and gave you no credit, so how is your business being "shown"? :nono
 
Kevin Hart quotes “in the 7 years I have been with PC&D, this is the first this has come up�



I love it when they say that!!!
 
Superior Shine said:
Author: Kevin Hart

Date: 06-03-05 10:40



As with many publications, when someone sends us photos they typically become house or 'stock' photos. Most people in this industry love having their businesses shown in the magazine, and in the 7 years I have been with PC&D, this is the first this has come up. However, I can understand how you feel and we will be sensitive to this going forward.



Kevin Hart

Publisher

Professional Carwashing & Detailing
Click to expand...



Just like Bxxx Cliton sex act. Denied Denied and Denied.
 
Superior Shine said:
... Kevin Hart, Publisher of Professional Carwashing & Detailing magazine. ..."As with many publications, when someone sends us photos they typically become house or 'stock' photos. ...
Click to expand...
I'm no expert on this sort of thing but that doesn't sound right to me.



I thought images can only be used as "stock" photos if they took them in the first place or the photographer specifically released them for unlimited use.





PC.
 
Joe,



Why don't you send them the original photo w/o all your information removed. Tell them to discard the one they published and let them know if they would like to use your photo in the future, the only one they have permission to use is the unedited version? IMO, that is the least the wea . . er. . guy can do.



"Most people in this industry love having their businesses shown in the magazine, and in the 7 years I have been with PC&D, this is the first this has come up."



. . . . because your business was NOT shown in the publication!!! Also, what if you don't want your image representing an article whose practices and /or suggestions you don't agree with? I would get it in writing that they shall not use photo's of you or by you in the future w/o your expressed written consent. M2C. . . I'd be upset.
 
Thanks all for your replies.



This happend awhile ago and they know not to use any of my pictures again. Unless they do it again I am going to drop this matter.



Again, thanks for your input.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top