Invoicing for unauthorised image use on an xmas card?

TheNissanMan

TheNissanMan

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,189
Name
Ryan
Edit My Images
Yes
I know this area has been covered before and there are posts on the forum but have a dilema.

I took some pictures of my neighbours cat a while back and while having a few drinks with them last night they showed me the christmas card which was made up from the photo I took of their cat jumping through the air.

First of all I just want clarification for my own mind as I haven't had this before.

According to the alamy calc using the smallest image size for promo postcards for one month the fee for the image should have been £100 for a run of upto 1000 cards so am guessing I would be safe to send an invoice for that amount for unauthorised use.

Now the iffy part as far as I am concerned. Currently photography is a hobby, it is something I would like to make some money from but also as a hobby not pro. The breeder has already indicated to my neighbours that they would like me to do some paid shoots for their new kittens so would you.

a) Leave the xmas card be and hope to get some paid work in the future

b) Send an invoice for x amount to the breeder and still hope to get the paid work?

Head is extremely fuzzy today as might just have had a few too many last night lol.
 
Did you take the picture as part of a paid shoot? ie did they pay for a photo then scan it? If so then you should have a word.

If you just took it as a friend, and gave them the picture then it's a different story. Although you know that you still own the copyright, I'm sure they wouldn't even think of it that way.

Reading back though, is it your neighbour who has made the card or the breeder? Did your neighbours pass on the picture? ...I think I must have had too much last night too, I'm a bit confused :)
 
The photo's were originally taken as a bit of fun for my neighbour with the photo's being passed accross free of charge and placed on our good old friend facebook.

The breeder has taken the photo from facebook and used it on the christmas card without speaking to myself of my friend whose cat it is. My friend of course doesn't mind it being used as it's their cat, I like the fact that it is used as it shows that someone likes my image enough to make a card from it but at the same time am sure I should be paid for it I would have thought.
 
Ah ok! Then you definitely need to have a word with the breeder. Lifting an image from facebook to use on their xmas cards isn't on.

Just be tactful about it though, maybe go and speak to them in person rather than just sending the invoice in the post. I don't think you should just let it go, if you do get paid work from them in future then what's to stop them breaching your copyright then too?
 
For god sake stop being greedy.

You gave them some photos you took for fun and they printed them on a Christmas card?

Be flattered, not greedy. This sounds like a great way to make them hate you and they probably wont pay up anyway.

If you want to make money from photos then find a professional way to do it. Don't wait for an innocent act by a previously-friendly neighbor then pounce on them quoting copyright law and demanding a nominal sum of money out of principle.
 
loplyg said:
For god sake stop being greedy.

You gave them some photos you took for fun and they printed them on a Christmas card?

Be flattered, not greedy. This sounds like a great way to make them hate you and they probably wont pay up anyway.

If you want to make money from photos then find a professional way to do it. Don't wait for an innocent act by a previously-friendly neighbor then pounce on them quoting copyright law and demanding a nominal sum of money out of principle.
Click to expand...

+1 really. Merry Christmas.

However. Any further ignorance of your copyright should be followed up with a hand delivered invoice.....
 
Agree with Rich. Doing a paid for session is one thing, but you did only take some pics for fun and then give them out. You put no value on them then, so why a value now?

Am not saying ignorance is a good excuse, but until joining this forum I never knew about copyright and probably would have given no thought to it and guess most people dont know the law either.
 
TheNissanMan said:
...I took some pictures of my neighbours cat a while back and while having a few drinks with them last night they showed me the christmas card which was made up from the photo I took of their cat jumping through the air...
Click to expand...
I think in this case you should relax and try to forget all the nasty feelings that bubbled up inside and caused you to make this post.
I very much doubt the Breeder is making any profit from your/your neighbour's image and everyone should enjoy a lovely kitteny Xmas.

Yuletidings! :)
 
loplyg said:
For god sake stop being greedy.

You gave them some photos you took for fun and they printed them on a Christmas card?
Click to expand...

No they didn't! If you read the post above, the cat OWNERS, (who were given the photo), did NOT know the breeder had lifted the image from Facebook and used it on the Christmas card.

The breeder has been naughty but has indicated there may be some paid work in the future (yeah right, that old chestnut). I think you would be within your rights to ask for some sort of payment...... but personally I wouldn't bother.

I would however, drop the breeder a note letting them know any further use of ANY of your images, including repeat use of this one, will be chargeable.
 
Be thankful that someone likes your photos and move on.
I had it happen to me with a Spanish magazine and some web images of the Easter Parade. They agreed to acknowledge that they were my photographs and I was more than happy.
 
Not worth souring your name over. As others have said, it was no value then and so it should be no value now.

If you can get work in the future from them then great and should they break and copyright laws then, well, you can act accordingly IF it happens.
 
Lots of bad advice here. Send an invoice!
 
TheNissanMan said:
I took some pictures of my neighbours cat a while back and while having a few drinks with them last night they showed me the christmas card which was made up from the photo I took of their cat jumping through the air.
Click to expand...

This could be either:-

  1. The start of a possible business contact for you.
  2. The start of a neighbour dispute that you could live to regret for years to come.

Which it becomes is entirely down to the way you handle this, but for me the potential hassle wouldn't be worth any payment.
 
?? The neighbour isn't involved. It's the breeder who stole the picture !
 
Ok my bad, missed the connection there, but advice would still be to tread carefully because the neighbour is involved albeit indirectly.
 
awp said:
Lots of bad advice here. Send an invoice!
Click to expand...


I would agree with Andrew here. wither you are making money or not the breeder is a business send them an invoice for £50 and tell them not to do it again.
 
In what way has the breeder used the image?

Are they are friend of your neighbour who's just stumbled across the photo on Facebook and taken it to make a one-off personal card for them?

or

Are they using the photo as part of a commercial run of cards to advertise their services to existing and prospective customers?

I know you may not have a definitive answer to that, but the feel and the content of the card should give you a clue. My reaction would be completely different depending on which of the 2 scenarios it was.
 
TheNissanMan said:
a) Leave the xmas card be and hope to get some paid work in the future
Click to expand...

A bit like having a picture in the local paper with your name on and waiting for the work to roll in....

Given the circumstances I would just go see them and see what happens...I wouldnt have an invoice in my hand when I do but I would keep it in mind :)
 
The way I see it - it's only a copyright issue if we're talking about a professional photographer here.

Copyright was designed to protect professionals from lost income due to copying.

If you never had ANY intentions of making money off the picture then stop trying to abuse a practical law for reasons of principle, and try being a friendly citizen instead.
 
In my opinion, for the value of a hundred quid, I would let it go and take a valuable lesson from it. If you are planning to turn pro (make money from your work) then never, ever take a photograph for fun unless you want to give the photo away.

Did you make it clear when taking the image that any reproduction would require payment? I understand where you stand legally but I wouldn't rock the boat for a mere hundred quid and taint any reputation you may want to build in the future.

Let it go. (IMHO)
 
Did the breeder just use the picture on their own personal cards or were the selling the cards?
 
loplyg said:
The way I see it - it's only a copyright issue if we're talking about a professional photographer here.

Copyright was designed to protect professionals from lost income due to copying.

If you never had ANY intentions of making money off the picture then stop trying to abuse a practical law for reasons of principle, and try being a friendly citizen instead.
Click to expand...

It is exactly this attitude that is causing the value of a photograph to be eroded.

We photographers, professional or not, should make every effort to ensure that the general public are aware that lifting photographs other people took and using them for whatever reason is unacceptable. Sure, it may not be worth invoicing over but the breeder needs to be told somehow.

Lets face it, there is a pretty good chance had they approached Ryan and asked the answer would have been yes anyway - but it is the principle of asking first that needs to be upheld.
 
Last edited:
Quaker said:
In my opinion, for the value of a hundred quid, I would let it go and take a valuable lesson from it. If you are planning to turn pro (make money from your work) then never, ever take a photograph for fun unless you want to give the photo away.

Did you make it clear when taking the image that any reproduction would require payment? I understand where you stand legally but I wouldn't rock the boat for a mere hundred quid and taint any reputation you may want to build in the future.

Let it go. (IMHO)
Click to expand...

Why would it taint his reputation, in my opinion he would only get a reputation for giving work away. Getting a reputation for rightfully invoicing for image usage ain't a bad reputation to have.

I would request a Purchase Order number for the image then issue an invoice.
 
dseered said:
Why would it taint his reputation, in my opinion he would only get a reputation for giving work away. Getting a reputation for rightfully invoicing for image usage ain't a bad reputation to have.

I would request a Purchase Order number for the image then issue an invoice.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I am wrong but the original shoot was a fun shoot and no discussion was made regarding payment.

If a pro footballer had a kick about with your son on the park as he was walking his dog, then sent you a bill for his trouble, you would be happy?
 
loplyg said:
The way I see it - it's only a copyright issue if we're talking about a professional photographer here.

Copyright was designed to protect professionals from lost income due to copying.

If you never had ANY intentions of making money off the picture then stop trying to abuse a practical law for reasons of principle, and try being a friendly citizen instead.
Click to expand...

Copyright was designed to prevent those who would use something which they do not own or have permission to use. Whether the copyright holder is amateur or professional is irrelevant so no-one is abusing anything here.
 
Doesn't matter if it was a 'fun' shoot - at best it was bad manners to use the pic wlthout asking -at worst a criminal offence!
 
Last edited:
Quaker said:
Correct me if I am wrong but the original shoot was a fun shoot and no discussion was made regarding payment.

If a pro footballer had a kick about with your son on the park as he was walking his dog, then sent you a bill for his trouble, you would be happy?
Click to expand...

Spot on. So what if my mother in law scans in a pic of my son and sends me a Christmas card with it on? Do I bill her?
 
Quaker said:
Correct me if I am wrong but the original shoot was a fun shoot and no discussion was made regarding payment.

If a pro footballer had a kick about with your son on the park as he was walking his dog, then sent you a bill for his trouble, you would be happy?
Click to expand...

I don't really think its the same thing, do you ?

If the neighbour had used the image then I would have had a laugh about it with them and extracted a few beers down the pub.

Its not the neighbour though, it is 'The Breeder' which if they are breeding, then I guess they are not giving the Kittens away, this in my mind makes them a commercial enterprise.

To take the image off Facebook is wrong, to then print from it is worse - I suspect that if they have a website it will be littered with other peoples images.

I know of a case recently where someone I know 'uncovered' some images being used on a website - to the tune over over 10K based on NUJ rates...........
Based upon the information we have been given they are in the wrong.
 
To cambsno: Now you're being ridiculous!
 
I did. Should have quoted. Sorry! I chased up and won several thousand pounds worth of images used illegally last year. It is always worthwhile. Only an amateur would argue otherwise.
 
Every time a photograph is 'stolen' and used by someone else to make money or increase business for themselves it devalues the worth of the professional photographers who do need to keep hold of their work and their copyright. There are thousands of people who take images which are of a professional quality (many on here for example) and if they give away their images it means that the pro loses out again.

In this case, as we don't know all the facts i.e if the cards are just for sending to friends etc or for atttracting business, I would suggest a friendly word in the breeder's ear and a gentle warning that further infringements would be dealt with via an invoice but that you would be prepared to consider any work they want to put your way at an agreed and reasonable fee.

Andy
 
A note to say the as the copyright holder you normal charge a fee for the use of images but please have the one off use as a Christmas gift to a potential client.
1 no one has a reason to be offended
2 you have let it be known that the use of images has to be paid for
3 it is Christmas you can look magnanimous
 
awp said:
To cambsno: Now you're being ridiculous!
Click to expand...

Not really. If you look at the basic info, someone did a shoot for a friend for fun.

The photo's were originally taken as a bit of fun for my neighbour with the photo's being passed accross free of charge and placed on our good old friend facebook.
Click to expand...

Now that to me implies that the images were given electronically. Well, when I sell electronic images, they include copyright. If there is an issue here then its with the kitten owner and the breeder as the kitten owner owns copyright, no?

Is the OP insured, if not, should he be looking to gain financially from his hobby? Not having a pop, but just trying to explain why I think what I think. Someone else here has said about devaluing the work of pros, so what about people doing 'fun sessions'?
 
If you look at the basic info, someone did a shoot for a friend for fun.
Click to expand...

and a third party - the breeder - stole the picture and used it without authorisation - straightforward.

The photographer own the copyright unless they specifically sign it away - the breeder in this case does NOT own the copyright. Now you're just chucking up red herrings that have nothing to do with the original problem - which is theft of an image.
 
Last edited:
if i was the breeder and got a bill i would send one for back for 5 times the price via a legal firm for using the cat as a model. tread carefully or you could wind up with this backfiring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top