And here's one...

[mbarrick]

...from the "Oh, yeah. That sounds great. I'll get right on that." file:

So the other day azrielknight mentioned in gothicbc that he was looking for photographers for Comatose Rose. I responded and he said he was hoping that I would be the one to get back to him and to drop him a line. So I did, asking him what the deal was. He responded:

It's pretty simple really, when we need an event covered, you go and take pictures. You just have to take them at 1600 by 1200 or higher.

We usually want 30 good photos,

You wont be aloud to put the same shots on your website, you can however put different shots from the same event up.

Uh, yeah. Right. My incentive for taking pictures and giving up the rights to them is exactly what here? I'll not post my images to where a few thousand people look at them and relinquish my copyright, and therefore my ability to make paintings from them (which is the point in the first place), for a small 'zine distributed in half a douzen clubs? And besides, "aloud"? Allowed Muh. I wrote back saying, sorry, I'll grant a right to publish in the magazine if I otherwise retain copyright.

He replied:

Sorry you feel that way. I wish I could bend on this one, but we can't change our policies for one man who hasn't even had a formal interview yet, my other photographers would be pissed. Now, my Toronto photographer posts the photos he does on his site, but nowhere else. So you could post the photos you take on your site provided they are stamped with our copyright.

Yeah. What a deal that is. Sure... and if I show my paintings in your office lobby for free it'll be "great exposure", if I work my ass off developing your no-business-plan asshat dot.com get-rich-quick website for nothing I might make millions, and a butt-monkey unpaid internship at your failing audio-post studio will make me great industry contacts.

Maybe if I was 22, fresh out of art-school, naïve, and dumb as a post...

Comments

[valerian.livejournal.com]

Maybe if I was 22, fresh out of art-school, naïve, and dumb as a post...

Just like he is?

I'm not surprised he didn't mention money. He's 22 and still lives at home.

[mediavictim.livejournal.com]

You realize now that I have your pictures in my video - they are mine ...MINE!!! Bwa ha ha ha ha ha - you will NEVER see them again.....


Is this guy on glue?
Give me your pictures.... and lose all rights to them?

That boy needs to give his head a shake.

COMATOSE ROSE - IN THIS ISSUE WE BEND UP COMMING PHOTOGRAPHERS OVER A CHAIR AND FUCK 'EM WITH OUR BIG GOTH COCKS


Jesus folks .. get over yourselves..you're a Fanzine.. be dead in 6 months...

LOL!!!

[replicant6.livejournal.com]

Bwaaaaahhhhaaaaaa!!!


That's awesome. I'm in such good spirits now. *snicker*


D

[seymour-glass.livejournal.com]

the funny part isn't that he has the nerve to suggest it in the first place...the really humourous part is when he chastises you for having a brain and asking for what rightfully belongs to you...now that's chutzpah!!! ah to be young and arrogant...

From the Iliad

[mbarrick.livejournal.com]

"Age and trechery will always triumph over youth and vigour."

Re: From the Iliad

[seymour-glass.livejournal.com]

well at least there's something to look forward to...ha ha...and so true it is...

[mediavictim.livejournal.com]

"one man who hasn't even had a formal interview yet,"

You hear the Michael you haven't EVEN had a formal interview
(FORMAL interview for a Goth Zine? Thats like a casual test of flatulance with the Queen)

You haven't EVEN had an interview.. you must be less than human

"my other photographers would be pissed"
Ahh , the language of a formal business letter

"Now, my Toronto photographer posts the photos he does on his site, but nowhere else"
Yes and your Toronto Photographer is an idiot

"So you could post the photos you take on your site provided they are stamped with our copyright."
Thats mightly generous of you .. and might I add that on your WEDDING NIGHT - you can still take your wife into the bed chamber - as long as she screams MY name.

Mental Floss

[langsuir.livejournal.com]

What really boggles the mind is where they got the bright idea that they could impose their copyright on the pictures in the first place. I have yet to see ANY magazine (or publication of any kind, actually) that doesn't give the photographer credit. Magazine covers, articles, advertisements....every single one of them has a little text block (usually in the lower right corner) that has the photographer's name. None of them say "Copyright, 2003, Cosmo," or "All rights reserved by Seventeen," or "We suckered a couplea moron photographers to give us the rights to their ART, because we're a bunch of pretentious gits."

Somebody needs to give these rockit psyentits a good shake.

Re: Mental Floss

[mbarrick.livejournal.com]

It does happen. If you are staff photographer (in which case you get paid) or you actually sell the complete rights (in which case you get paid) to the publisher then you'll see things like "© Associated Press" or whatever. Which is usually the case for budding freelance photographers à la Peter Parker. Most of the time it's only limited publication rights that are sold. The photographer almost always retains the right to display, exhibit, print, etc. their own work.

I've previously done some homework in regards to copyright law, and, personally, I'm not fond of standing copyright law and like the work done at Creative Commons (http://creativecommons.org) (done by some heavyweights in the field of copyright law, the legal departments at Harvard and Stanford, and other contributors). I really should invest some time in a proper legal copyright pages for my websites. I have a specific (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/1.0/legalcode) license in mind with the pictures on Gothic BC, but nothing on the site about it (which isn't so bad, since under the law that means I retain all rights by default).