Photographers, Contests and Photo Rights

I personally advise when the question is asked here that people fully read the terms of the contests. If it says you relinquish all rights then it is most likely a stock photography grab. If they leave you your rights then it is most likely a legitimate contest. Also if they want free use then it is most likely a scam. When they keep the use of the images for solely the contest then it is good. Not that many online do that. I never enter online contests except for one and that was for the National Parks photo contest, which says the images you submit are yours and that they will only use them for Park service publication. Even the government limits the use they have which is amazing considering they consider almost everything else as theirs.

Scotty: There is something called exchange and it comes in different levels. The lowest is getting something for nothing. For an organization to say that they can make money off your work and not compensate you for it is a rip-off.. They also make it difficult for people to understand what exactly they are agreeing too. Banks are required to give a full disclosure so their client knows exactly what it's costing them, but these contests are not.

Baydream: Without the legalese I would have it worded something like:

1) Limit the amount of time that the organization can use the submission for, maybe 3 or 5 years. There would be a clause stating if I wanted to use it for a longer period the organization would ask for permission. (Personally, if an organization came to me 5 years later and asked to use the photo in a brochure again I'd be honored if it's one of those listed in another post)

2) I would limited the 'promotional use' to non-saleable items (brochures, flyers, gallery on website, etc) Not books, calenders or other items that are making the company money and not giving anything to the photographers.

3) If a book or other saleable item is to be made all the photographers would be offered the same package (except the person getting put on the cover would receive something in addition) This package could include a copy of the final product and a letter acknowledging that their piece is being used in whatever it is that can be used as a reference. The book would also contain contact information for the artist included in it. If you change your web address, well, that is your responsibility At least then the photographers are being acknowledged and given something in return. Hopefully they wouldn't feel like they are being ripped off.

Seems to me they're covering their butts from being sued by photographers who don't like that they lost. LOL

Stealthy Ninja wrote: Seems to me they're covering their butts from being sued by photographers who don't like that they lost. LOL

True. The reputable ones are covering their butts and, in order to stay reputable, would limit their usage anyway. Joves is correct in that most says to promote the contest and that is cool. All the "lawyer speak" is to avoid lawsuits from "offended" folks who decide they can make money through legal action. I avoid those contest that require an entry fee or are not run by reputable organizations that have a lot to lose by over-reaching their "rights".
As I stated before, I have one friend who jump-started his site by winning a national Nikon contest and another who's workshop I attended who won a similar contest. Any revenue lost from those two photos has been recovered many, many times over.

I have been published in several local and a national newspaper group (with attribution) without compensation but considered it advertising in a way.

I don't personally think that a boycott will spread since many fine upcoming photographers will fill the gap but that is just my personal opinion. I will examine each contest and conduct a risk analysis on the cost benefits of entering.

I fully respect your opinion but after checking the vital signs on this horse, it's DEAD.