Photographers: Understand the Value of your Images
Thursday, August 13th, 2009 by Lucinda M. DuggerI had lunch last week with Washington, DC-based photographer, instructor, and copyright advocate Sam D’Amico who told me that he discusses copyright with his students on the first day of class. He urges his students to think for themselves about the issue and presents them with this scenario:
If you were completely out of money and had to sell one thing that relates to your photography passion or career what would that be?
Students quickly suggest that they would sell their camera or printer or framing tools. Yes, Sam agrees that those are viable options, but an even better option would be to use your rights given to you under copyright law and license your photos.
Light bulbs turn on in some of his students, while others begin to understand the concept as he continues the lecture.
Sam tells me that the life of a photographer can have its struggles, especially if the photographer is not making any money off his work. Though some of his students seek to merely refine techniques for a hobby, others hope to make that leap into a full-time photography career. Whatever path they choose, he advises them to register their photos with the US Copyright Office, and explore as many revenue streams as possible, including licensing and selling photos.
Another photographer, Lisa Jack, is experiencing the trials of owning the copyright to highly-coveted photos. As a photography student at Occidental College in the 1980s, a colleague of hers suggested that she take pictures of a freshman student “Barry” Obama for a portrait project. For 28 years these photos were out of sight (from what I can tell, she only developed the photos negatives), until she decided to pull them out when Obama became President.
Jack has made a conscious effort to make sure that her photos are used in a manner that she agrees with (like showing them in an LA gallery). And she has been clear that she does not want the photos used for political purposes; otherwise, she would have “sold them to Hillary years ago.”
However, not everyone respects the guidelines that Jack – as the copyright owner – has sought for the use and distribution of her photos. The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) has not only used one of Jack’s photos without her permission, but has also used it for political purposes. This nonprofit advocacy group that “represents the interests of the tens of millions of Americans who smoke marijuana responsibly” took Jack’s photo of Obama smoking a cigarette and put what looks like a joint in his hand. This photo was then put on a poster with swirls, puffy letters, and the phrase “Yes We Cannabis” to make a strung-out, psychedelic-looking graphic.
NORML Executive Director Allen St. Pierre seems dismissive of the fact that they knowingly used the photo without Jack’s permission. Though he at first says that the photo was used “with very little adulteration,” he justifies fair use by saying that “our lawyers thought it was adulterated enough.” Though I am not a lawyer, I have a hard time seeing that fair use could be justified merely by changing the shape of the object being smoked.
In addition, NORML is seeking to make a profit off the posters (of which Jack will see none of). It hopes to sell them on its website for $15.00. If the buyer wants Allen St. Pierre’s autograph on the poster, then he can buy it for $25.00.
I’m not quite sure why St. Pierre would be signing the posters at all since neither the poster design (Sonia Sanchez designed the poster) nor the photograph are the result of his creative efforts. At any rate, he clearly values his signature much more highly than either of the artists’ works since one has to pay an extra $10.00 for it.
So what’s the lesson for photographers here? Understand the value that your images have. What may be in your closet today might be coveted tomorrow. Learn the rights that you are given under copyright law and register your work with the US Copyright Office.
