OS Photofit Comp - calendar mess up

James Blonde

James Blonde

Suspended / Banned
Messages
405
Name
Scott
Edit My Images
Yes
Argh.

I had a couple of photos picked up by Ordnance Survey as part of their Photofit competition to pick new map covers and was chuffed to bits when they used one in their publicity releases, and by sheer luck found out yesterday that they were using the other one in their 2016 calendar. Only there was one small problem - the name on the press release wasn't mines. They'd wrongly attributed the photo to someone else. I got in touch with them to check it was an error, which they quickly corrected on the press release but I had a horrible feeling that the error wasn't going to be limited to that, and they confirmed this morning that the calendar also had the photo wrongly attributed. So basically OS are going to get a pile of calendar sales with the credit for (at least!) one image going to the wrong person. They've offered £50 in vouchers for their map store in compensation.

I know the competition was a bit of a touchy subject with some, asking people to give away their images for commercial use in return for a free map and a years subscription, and I know that it upset a fair number of people. I've always been a big map fan though so I could accept that as long as the photographers were credited, I was OK with us getting just a little bit of exposure. But what happens when you're not credited correctly? I'm sure it's a genuine mistake but...

Incidentally, I'd also suggest other folk check that they've been properly credited as well, though I'm sure OS will be doing that themselves.

What the hell do you do about something like this?!
 
What actual written agreement did you have with them?
 
Whatever the terms and conditions of the competition were.

https://os.uk/photofit/terms-and-conditions.html

Of which this is probably the appropriate paragraph:


  1. YOUR OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
  2. All photos must be the original work of the entrant must not infringe the copyright or other intellectual property rights of any person or organisation;
  3. You will retain copyright in any photos that you submit to the Competition.
  4. By entering the Competition you grant to OS (and Ordnance Survey Leisure Limited), a non- exclusive, royalty free, worldwide, perpetual licence to publish your photo(s) on the OS Photofit website, our corporate website and social media websites (such as Facebook and Twitter), and otherwise use the photo, in connection with this Competition.
  5. In the event that your photo is one of the Competition winners, you further grant to OS and Ordnance Survey Leisure Limited a non-exclusive, royalty free, worldwide and perpetual licence to publish the photo(s) on the cover of any of its paper maps, on the OS website, in promotional materials and otherwise use the photo in connection with the business of OS. If your photo is appearing on one of our map covers, we assume that you will want your name to appear on the map cover to indicate that you are the photographer/copyright owner and by entering the Competition you agree that we can do this.
  6. For the avoidance of doubt, no fees will be payable for any use of your photo(s) in connection with this Competition. In the event that we would like to use your photo for any other purpose we will contact you to discuss terms of use.
  7. By entering the Competition you agree to take part in any reasonable promotions and publicity relating to it.
  8. You warrant to us that the image files you upload do not contain any viruses or other potentially harmful material.
 
James Blonde said:
If your photo is appearing on one of our map covers, we assume that you will want your name to appear on the map cover to indicate that you are the photographer/copyright owner and by entering the Competition you agree that we can do this.
Click to expand...

Doesn't really appear to give you the 'right' to have that, merely requiring your agreement for them to do so.
I'm guessing that it might be a copyright infringement in assigning copyright to someone else but the legal costs might be challenging.
I would certainly formally write to them and express my extreme displeasure at copyright being assigned to someone else.
 
It's an odd situation, and sheer luck that I spotted the error. I'm a little upset that I won't be credited for one of my images, but I am really upset that someone else will be! I'd personally want that put right, but that's obviously not going to be possible when the calendars are already going to be printed. Money isn't going to put anything right (and with the best will in the world, what would I spend £50 worth of OS vouchers on? Calendars for Christmas presents with someone else's name on? :P) I mean in reality, is there anything that can be done to put it right?
 
No, but its really immaterial, they did pay you for the image..right?

Edit, they didn't but your name below your image is as much use to you as a chocolate firegaurd.

The maps are infinitely more useful, take the vouchers.
 
Last edited:
James Blonde said:
the calendars are already going to be printed.
Click to expand...

If they aren't already being printed then it should be possible to change it, or at least print a correction in the inside cover or somewhere.
 
ST4 said:
No, but its really immaterial, they did pay you for the image..right?

Edit, they didn't but your name below your image is as much use to you as a chocolate firegaurd.

The maps are infinitely more useful, take the vouchers.
Click to expand...

As you say, no they didn't pay for the image, though I did get a couple of free maps out of it...

It is and it isn't useless - at least I can point to it and say it was definitely mines! Small things....

As for the maps, normally I'd agree, but I have a LOT of maps....

I'm checking to see if they've been printed - my guess is they have... but I'm formulating an interesting proposition for them....
 
Last edited:
I have to ask, what use is it to you to see your name at the bottom of an image on the cover of a map?

If you like the image, get it printed and framed and on your wall, or sell it either in a local gallery or on your website, or pimp it out for stock...ie ,make money from it :D
 
ST4 said:
I have to ask, what use is it to you to see your name at the bottom of an image on the cover of a map?
Click to expand...
It's his image, surely he has the right to see it credited correctly :)
 
Yeh, it's pretty much exactly as Gramps says. Even no credit would have been better. But don't worry ST4, I'm at least attempting to do all those things as well! :D
 
gramps said:
It's his image, surely he has the right to see it credited correctly :)
Click to expand...

I just have to ask what benefit the credit actually is. He's not been paid for the image, if they paid someone else I'd understand the upset, but your name in small print on the bottom of a calendar or map....it is of no benefit one way or the other. The OP knows the image is his. They've not stolen the image as he's allowed them to use it, I'd understand being upset over a stolen image as thats lost money. But the OP is not financially out. Its really not worth bothering about.

Maybe that's a difference of opinion, but a small print of your name below a photograph does nothing for you. Did you know I sold one to country life through Alamy in June. No. Neither did I until I saw it and checked my balance on Alamy. Neither does anyone else - no-one looks at photocredits and remembers who took the image, they just don't.
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
I just have to ask what benefit the credit actually is. He's not been paid for the image, if they paid someone else I'd understand the upset, but your name in small print on the bottom of a calendar or map....it is of no benefit one way or the other. The OP knows the image is his. They've not stolen the image as he's allowed them to use it, I'd understand being upset over a stolen image as thats lost money. But the OP is not financially out. Its really not worth bothering about.
Click to expand...

I disagree 100% and suggest most other togs would too.
Not having a credit is one thing but having it credited to someone else is over the line IMO.
 
gramps said:
I disagree 100% and suggest most other togs would too.
Not having a credit is one thing but having it credited to someone else is over the line IMO.
Click to expand...

It's a mistake. Unless it hurt my back pocket I really wouldn't care much. He's getting a load of freebies (ie payment in kind that he would not have normally got), thats good enough ie their mistake has made him money.
 
It could potentially hurt my pocket... If I can point to a calendar or a map where my image has been published, I can use it for publicity myself - "Hey I'm a credible, published photographer, here's proof, buy my stuff!" (yeh yeh, I know... ;) ) It's the same as your image being used by Country Life - yeh, nobody but you knows it's your image, but I bet you're even just a little bit chuffed that your work has been published, and can use that in a portfolio or in further promoting your work. On the other hand, people might just buy the calendar and the map I'd just advertised, where I'd get nothing anyway - hey ho! :D
 
Just push OS further, you have nothing to lose now and everything to gain. Tell them their compensation is inadequate and that they should reconsider what they have offered.

Incidentally, I noticed last time I did buy one of their maps, they had started using photos with creative commons attributes rather than engaging/using a proper photographer. I should be pleased as a tax payer, but see it as similar to the BBC et al, trying to get something for nothing.
 
James Blonde said:
It could potentially hurt my pocket... If I can point to a calendar or a map where my image has been published, I can use it for publicity myself - "Hey I'm a credible, published photographer, here's proof, buy my stuff!" (yeh yeh, I know... ;) ) It's the same as your image being used by Country Life - yeh, nobody but you knows it's your image, but I bet you're even just a little bit chuffed that your work has been published, and can use that in a portfolio or in further promoting your work. On the other hand, people might just buy the calendar and the map I'd just advertised, where I'd get nothing anyway - hey ho! :D
Click to expand...

The first thing I felt wasn't chuffed but outraged, I didn't realise the agency sold it and thus initially thought it had been stolen from me. As it were, it only makes you around £40 a sale like that, but £40 is £40 more than nothing
 
Last edited:
Well they got back to me quickly! I asked them to give the money to the corporate charity the proceeds of the calendar are going to, give me a couple of calendars that I can give to the folks, and run a series of social media features highlighting the photographers they've used on their map covers (me included). They seem up for that and it seems a reasonable result to me
 
As they're clearly in breach of copyright (the act gives the author the right to be identified) then you could ask for significantly more.

Knowingly publishing a copyright work with the wrong attribution and for profit??? Very dodgy grounds.
 
st599 said:
As they're clearly in breach of copyright (the act gives the author the right to be identified) then you could ask for significantly more.

Knowingly publishing a copyright work with the wrong attribution and for profit??? Very dodgy grounds.
Click to expand...

sadly its not that straight forward

Sect 77 of the CDP act 1998 gives that right, but sect 78 says that sect 77 is not infringed unless the copyright owner has asserted the right to be identified in the instrument assigning the work - so if the OP didn't specifically assert his right to be identified when he submitted the picture they are not in breach of copyright.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top