Max Spielmann copying my photographs..where do I stand?

[Andy90]

Scougar is quite right, people will try to make additional copies, but there is a world of difference between a parent who has purchased a picture making an additional copy at home with say a scanner and an inkjet and a commercial company making the copies and charging for them. They're both infringements however.

The parent has more than likely paid the OP's company. The company who infringes on the copyright is leaching off the OP.

I would ask to speak to someone from your local trading standards in person. Trading Standards are quick enough to get people arrested and seizing goods when it comes to counterfeit CD's and other forgeries and this is no different. Perhaps they will set up a 'test' purchase of a copy of one of your images and you might pursuade them to run an article in the local press about it.

 

[Nexus]

To be fair, if your client had taken photos to be developed at Max Spielmann they probably didn't come out properly. I've not used them for nearly ten years, I wasn't even aware they were still going. They were cheap, but the prints reflected that. I seem to remember them coming bottom in a test by Which? of High Street Printers.

 

[-TA-]

Im amazed Max Spielmann are still going! they were beyond terrible,, chemicals for film dev all wrong, cheap poorly maintained equipment and prints that were just shocking!

Staff didn't know what they are doing, seems not such has changed!

I would take them to the cleaners!

 

[mr tommo]

Scougar is quite right, people will try to make additional copies, but there is a world of difference between a parent who has purchased a picture making an additional copy at home with say a scanner and an inkjet and a commercial company making the copies and charging for them. They're both infringements however.

The parent has more than likely paid the OP's company. The company who infringes on the copyright is leaching off the OP.

I would ask to speak to someone from your local trading standards in person. Trading Standards are quick enough to get people arrested and seizing goods when it comes to counterfeit CD's and other forgeries and this is no different. Perhaps they will set up a 'test' purchase of a copy of one of your images and you might pursuade them to run an article in the local press about it.

Yeah, I understand that people will scan the photographs at home if they have the equipment and to be honest I don't (unofficially) mind that. It's also illegal but they've paid for our services in the first place and the chances are the quality of something they come out with from their home printer isn't going to be great anyway.

Like you have pointing out its the fact that MS are making money from our photography service. I mean they physically took the photograph from the customer, took it out of OUR mount with our company name on the front of the mount and then scanned it to make themselves a few quid.

Waiting for trading standards to get back in touch now. I'm not sure I'd like to use the local press as I wouldn't want to come across badly. I think if I was to put this argument forward to some of the more simple minded people around, they wouldn't see a problem with getting it printed due to their lack of knowledge about copyright so I feel that might have a negative effect. Obviously most people know what goes into making said photography.

At the end of the day MS are there to provide a public printing service for holiday snaps and amatuers, not to make a few quid scanning professional photographers work.

I'll keep you all updated.

 

[mrthingyx]

Technically, you are in the right and have the full weight of the law behind you to go after the customer who breached your copyright and potentially MS unless they have an adequate disclaimer...

Practically, however, you will only damage yourself and your company if you decide to do anything about it... Your profession is all about reputation, and that comes from your customers who probably won't understand copyright and will get upset when you tell them they're wrong.

Take it on the chin and get your business process sorted so that the risk of breach and supposed lossof revenue doesn't happen again.

 

[mr tommo]

I've said theres no chance of me chasing the customer. Its bad business practice and will only harm our reputation. But...if theres any chance that I can see that this doesn't happen again with MS, I will. If that involves getting trading standards involved (which seeing as they have said they are free to copy work without permission) then so be it.

 

[AHarvey]

Ignore the local shop and the area manager, they are idiots. Only deal with the head office, get a managers name there and only speak to them.

Tell them that you have been informed, and rather rudely so, by the area manager and the local branch that you are wrong and you feel they need informing of the correct process to stop any further issues.

I would also demand an apology from the area manager, and request they have a sign up in the shop stating that unless the customer owns copyright of an image or printing rights that they will not be able to copy them.

Try and keep as much of your communication done via email or letter so you have written proof of everything. Record phone calls as well if you can.

Unfortunately, it is the nature of our business. Those people saying "get your business processes sorted" obviously do not understand that copying will, and always will go on no matter what steps you take.

Other things you can do include stamping the back of the photos (or use labels) stating that "it is an offence to copy this photo in anyway" and a contact number.

 

[Btone]

so you going to local underfunded schools and offering them money so you can go in and disrupt a schoolday so that you can exploit the parent/child bond to make a profit, then you are complaining that someone else is exploiting your work to also make a profit based on copyright laws that are so out of date they a joke.

 

[mr tommo]

Ignore the local shop and the area manager, they are idiots. Only deal with the head office, get a managers name there and only speak to them.

Tell them that you have been informed, and rather rudely so, by the area manager and the local branch that you are wrong and you feel they need informing of the correct process to stop any further issues.

I would also demand an apology from the area manager, and request they have a sign up in the shop stating that unless the customer owns copyright of an image or printing rights that they will not be able to copy them.

Try and keep as much of your communication done via email or letter so you have written proof of everything. Record phone calls as well if you can.

Unfortunately, it is the nature of our business. Those people saying "get your business processes sorted" obviously do not understand that copying will, and always will go on no matter what steps you take.

Other things you can do include stamping the back of the photos (or use labels) stating that "it is an offence to copy this photo in anyway" and a contact number.

I wish like you said this whole thing was dealt with via email because they would have totally set themselves up for a fall if what they said on the phone was in an email. Everything will be dealt with via email/letters now

so you going to local underfunded schools and offering them money so you can go in and disrupt a schoolday

Totally their choice. We don't force them to have us. Most parents would be disappointed if they didn't have a photo of their child at nursery/school.

so that you can exploit the parent/child bond to make a profit, then you are complaining that someone else is exploiting your work to also make a profit based on copyright laws that are so out of date they a joke.

Exploit the parent by offering them photos of their child WITH NO OBLIGATION TO BUY? Come on get real.

I take it you have no experience of business? The schools set aside dates for photographs every year. Or did you think its only the "underfunded exploited nursery/schools" that have annual photos done?

 

[growse]

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert but if you retain the copyright to these (and don't give it to the customer) then you shouldn't you be writing something a bit more stern than a complaint? What they're doing is theft and you should be making them aware of that. Also, isn't the customer who's getting them reproduced also breaking your copyright?

*sigh*. It's not theft. It's (maybe) copyright infringment, assuming the customer doesn't own the copyright.

so you going to local underfunded schools and offering them money so you can go in and disrupt a schoolday so that you can exploit the parent/child bond to make a profit, then you are complaining that someone else is exploiting your work to also make a profit based on copyright laws that are so out of date they a joke.

Wow.

*snip*

There's a number of different approaches here. Sure, the principle is important, but you're a business. Every penny you spend on fighting this has to be worth it to your bottom line. It's pointless to spend hours/days and hundreds of pounds (if you get lawyers involved) on something where the total theoretical cost to you is only in the tens of pounds range. Unfortunately, companies break the law all the time, they just treat the implications and probably of being caught as another risk of doing business.

Personally, I'd probably leave it where you've got to and move on. If it were more systematic and widespread, I'd absolutely pursue it, but for an isolated incident, it's probably not worth your time. Just my 2p

 

[Rojin]

so you going to local underfunded schools and offering them money so you can go in and disrupt a schoolday so that you can exploit the parent/child bond to make a profit, then you are complaining that someone else is exploiting your work to also make a profit based on copyright laws that are so out of date they a joke.

That is perhaps the single most idiotic post I have read on here this year, well done, have a cookie.

 

[Rojin]

Mr tommo, I'd post in the TP business forum. You'll get responses from people who have dealt with it before. http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=43

 

[Btone]

Totally their choice. We don't force them to have us. Most parents would be disappointed if they didn't have a photo of their child at nursery/school

well from talking to my uni friends who work/are married to people who work in schools 1 runs a private nursery 2 work in primary schools, 4 work in secondary schools (2 are dept heads) and one is a headmaster, the one thing they all complain about id funding. so you dont think that when the headmaster is looking at the schools budget he doesnt think to him/her self mmm schools photos made a nice sum of money last year lets do it again

Exploit the parent by offering them photos of their child WITH NO OBLIGATION TO BUY? Come on get real.

again (talking to my friends) i've yet to hear one of them say, "shame there was no schools photos this year" indeed parents love seeing there children in photos of their schools uniforms every time i walk pass a studio the window is full of portraits of chrildren in school uniforms . truth is most parents don't care, they buy them because they send home and they feel bad if they didn't buy something (after all who want to say to their children "sorry but you too ugly to buy a photo of you" or "yes i know your friends are getting the photo but we too poor to buy them"

The schools set aside dates for photographs every year. Or did you think its only the "underfunded exploited nursery/schools" that have annual photos done?

yes i know they do that ive had to buy enough photos to know they do it every year that doesn't alter the fact that it disrupts the teaching it just means it disrupted every year, that around 12 days in a school life time, you try going to a school and telling them you taking your children out of school for 12 days and see what they say

I take it you have no experience of business?

ooo some one not agreeing with you so they must have no experience
i will assume you mean The business (meaning the photography business)
and you right i don't run a photography business, the business i do run only uses a studio for the photos for the catalogues we do, the advertising posters we do, the flyers, and so on

 

[Btone]

That is perhaps the single most idiotic post I have read on here this year, well done, have a cookie.

can it be a double chocolate chip one pretty please

 

[Rojin]

can it be a double chocolate chip one pretty please

Of course

It doesn't take your child out of school for 12 days at all, the photo session lasts about an hour for a child. So that'd be 12 hours over 12 years... I find your point of view fascinating, yet completely at odds with my experiences (as a child and as a father).

 

[mr tommo]

*sigh*. It's not theft. It's (maybe) copyright infringment, assuming the customer doesn't own the copyright.



Wow.



There's a number of different approaches here. Sure, the principle is important, but you're a business. Every penny you spend on fighting this has to be worth it to your bottom line. It's pointless to spend hours/days and hundreds of pounds (if you get lawyers involved) on something where the total theoretical cost to you is only in the tens of pounds range. Unfortunately, companies break the law all the time, they just treat the implications and probably of being caught as another risk of doing business.

Personally, I'd probably leave it where you've got to and move on. If it were more systematic and widespread, I'd absolutely pursue it, but for an isolated incident, it's probably not worth your time. Just my 2p

I'd just be happy in the knowledge that I've been in touch with HQ, made my feelings known and threaten them with further action so that they can contact their local branches and make them away of the copyright problems. I don't intend for this to cost us any money other than to know that the next time this happens they think twice and act accordingly.

Mr tommo, I'd post in the TP business forum. You'll get responses from people who have dealt with it before. http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=43

Will do that this weekend mate thank you. Never used TP forums before so I'll get signed up

well from talking to my uni friends who work/are married to people who work in schools 1 runs a private nursery 2 work in primary schools, 4 work in secondary schools (2 are dept heads) and one is a headmaster, the one thing they all complain about id funding. so you dont think that when the headmaster is looking at the schools budget he doesnt think to him/her self mmm schools photos made a nice sum of money last year lets do it again




again (talking to my friends) i've yet to hear one of them say, "shame there was no schools photos this year" indeed parents love seeing there children in photos of their schools uniforms every time i walk pass a studio the window is full of portraits of chrildren in school uniforms . truth is most parents don't care, they buy them because they send home and they feel bad if they didn't buy something (after all who want to say to their children "sorry but you too ugly to buy a photo of you" or "yes i know your friends are getting the photo but we too poor to buy them"



yes i know they do that ive had to buy enough photos to know they do it every year that doesn't alter the fact that it disrupts the teaching it just means it disrupted every year, that around 12 days in a school life time, you try going to a school and telling them you taking your children out of school for 12 days and see what they say



ooo some one not agreeing with you so they must have no experience
i will assume you mean The business (meaning the photography business)
and you right i don't run a photography business, the business i do run only uses a studio for the photos for the catalogues we do, the advertising posters we do, the flyers, and so on

It's not about the schools making a packet. Out of interest how much does your friend earn that runs a nursery school, from letting a photographer in? I'll guess at between £75-£150. Hardly a money making exercise is it?

Again with nurseries, when you think that our customers avergage spend is many multiples of the £6 6"x4" that we offer as our cheapest optiion. Does that sound like people genuinely feel oblidged to have them incase the kid thinks they are ugly?

Not got time to reply to the rest and I totally disagree with most of what you are saying

 

[Btone]

ok am home , warm and well feed and in a better mood, so i would like to apologize for my earlier comments if they were a bit harsh it been a rough morning trying to get deliveries out when the road like a ice rink. linda who runs the private nursery school doesn't do photos , but if you want i can ask Adrian (headmaster) when i see him in the new year if you really want. and like it or not you are using peer marking to sell the school photos, at the end of the day there nothing wrong with that, you just doing the same as the toy and sweats shops.

as to advice , you barking up the wrong tree over the copyright, from read your other posts it wasn't clearly marked as being copyright and you will spend more money fighting it than what it worth. write a letter off to the HQ asking them to remind there offices not to copy photo that are copyright and make sure you have a stamp on all photo


the question you should be asking is why did she not come to you for the copy
i am unclear on one thing did this person buy the photo first then copy it or did she copy it while she had it out for approval. if she copy it while out on approval i would be writing a very stern letter telling her that she broke the law and asking her to pay up.
if she bought it then made a copy, you need to find out why. i would suggest making out a questioner and sending it to her + other parents from that school, try to find out if it was price, was it just handy for her to use max, did she not know you would make extra copy's, ect ect. the more info you find out the better ie if it was price why she did it you can adjust, if it max is in a better location you can market yourself better when you sell the photo. and who knows what else you find out from it.

 

[neil_g]

as to advice , you barking up the wrong tree over the copyright, from read your other posts it wasn't clearly marked as being copyright and you will spend more money fighting it than what it worth. write a letter off to the HQ asking them to remind there offices not to copy photo that are copyright and make sure you have a stamp on all photo

Sorry but thats rubbish. How many paintings do you see with a copyright stamped on them.

Copyright is automatically given at the creation of a works including photography it doesn't need to be marked for you to go to court and get damages for usage without permission if you so choose.

 

[A.N.Other]

so you going to local underfunded schools and offering them money so you can go in and disrupt a schoolday so that you can exploit the parent/child bond to make a profit, then you are complaining that someone else is exploiting your work to also make a profit based on copyright laws that are so out of date they a joke.

Lol?

 

[AHarvey]

as to advice , you barking up the wrong tree over the copyright, from read your other posts it wasn't clearly marked as being copyright and you will spend more money fighting it than what it worth. write a letter off to the HQ asking them to remind there offices not to copy photo that are copyright and make sure you have a stamp on all photo

The point is that it doesn't have to be clearly marked, anyone working in the photography or printing industry should know copyright laws and this is the whole point of the thread.

Customers will always be ignorant of such issues, even if you have it plainly written out in a contact, they either don't know, or just don't care. And the reason they go elsewhere, is price.