Hey @kieranstone, from a photographers perspective I can def. agree with this. However, there are people who simply do not know how copyright works. The most beneficial way for both parties is to educate and propose the plagiarist to purchase a license for the normal fee, before adding extra fees. This will make your lawsuit, if it ever turns out to become one, more realistic. In the defense of a plagiarist they could simply tell that they 'honestly' did not know and that they would like to have an opportunity to pay the normal price whatever you would charge. I have a list of different types of licenses plus prices on my business website, that are usually very well received by the judge or lawyer whenever I have to point this out that it is clearly visible and stated on my website. Even after purchasing a license I 'demand' credit under my work, unless agreed differently. I know this is frustrating, but try to keep your cool and see it as an opportunity to get paid for your work without spending too much time into court. Focusing on creating more awesome photographs is so much more rewarding ;-). Wish you all the best of luck.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The few people that I have got in touch with have paid me what I asked for, which was no different from a standard licence few for what they used the image for. They like to argue about the price and I say "I'm not going to negotiate the price after you've already stolen my image". Another thing is "ignorance is not innocence". I am a strong advocate for Photographers rights and provide information in my podcast too.
Thank you for writing your post too as the more people are aware of these things the better off the industry will be. I have resteemed :)
Copyright automatically applies to any photo I take. I don't need to register it. Licencing of images can be 1000's of dollars per image depending on the use so it's worth chasing people if they've taken it without consent. It doesn't happen often but even once is too much.