Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 123458 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 184

Thread: Health Promotion Board Digital Competition 2005

  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    East of Singapore
    Posts
    1,750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    Firstly, PSS's role in this competition is to provide the judges, judging venue and exhibition venue. That is all. HPB has their legal department to draft their form. We have worked with HPB before and we trust their integrity as an organisation.We trust that they will not misuse the image. We also have to respect their rules and regulation.


    secondly, PSS is not always involved in the drafting of the rules and regulations. However, for Life is Great competition, PSS is involved and consulted in the process.

    PSS is not a legal entity and our objectives is mainly to promote photography in Singapore. We do not have the legal teams to provide advise for photographers. Every organiser of competitions have their reasons and objectives. Itis very much up to the decision of photographers whether to take part or not. It is like lottery tickets. You got the money, but it is your choice whether to get a ticket and try your luck to win big prizes. If you lose, your money is forfeited. If you win, your small investment multiply many folds.
    As I've said before, if PSS is only involved in some aspect and not the T&Cs, than PSS will not voice up even if the T&Cs are against the very people that PSS are trying to help, namely the photographer?

    If PSS, as part of the org/process of this competation, when knowing something is wrong, do not speak up for the rights of photographers, tell us who esle is close enough to HPB to voice up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    Inmy opinion, if HPB really wants images, they have their team of photographers and they have the resources to hire professional photographers.
    I'm sure they do. They are after all part of a stat. board. That is why I find it so unreasonable to say that you have give them full copyrights and if we get sued when THEY use the images, it is not their problem and you have to shoulder all the cost/blame to settle it. And still, PSS knowing full well all this, does nothing and even endorse the competation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    Let us just reflect, and enjoy the shooting process.

    We have more things to achieve in life.
    Yes, let's all do that.
    PSS should reflect if it should do nothing to protect the very people it claim to promote photography to, especially so when things that are not right are happening right under their nose.

    PSS should reflect if it should warn photographers who are enjoying the shooting process for this competation that there is a knife hanging over their head.

    After so many years and so many good photographers have come and gone through PSS, can PSS claim that they can advise photographers on matters relating not only to the process of photography but also on their rights as a photographer? Can PSS at least try to achieve that? Do PSS dare to challange a gov.org. and educate them that their T&Cs are not right?

    Mr Yee, I have no doubt that you're a good photographer as well as a very helpful one at that. Past post by other CSers here about course conducted by you were full of prise for you. What I find unacceptable and cannot understand ( to the point that it makes my blood boil ) is that, given that PSS have been around for so long, with so many members and some are even professional, how can PSS stand by and do NOTHING when it sees things like this happening! Just because they're not part of the team that drew up the T&Cs, they do nothing even if something is wrong with it? Is this how the top photography club in Singapore think? How can PSS say " We have worked with HPB before and we trust their integrity as an organisation.We trust that they will not misuse the image." if something do go wrong, can we TRUST that PSS or HPB will help us?
    PSS have been promoting photography in Singapore for so long. Are they still doing the same thing they have been doing 10,15 years ago? Just promoting the process of taking pictures and nothing else? Come on, straighten your backbone, tell whoever needs your help " the rights and welfare of the photographer have to be looked into. I cannot endorse anything that will put the photographer at a disadvantage ".

    Bear in mind that PSS is not just any club in SG, to many it is the top photography club in SG. On par or even higher than PPAS ( Professional Photographer's Association of Singapore ), if PSS does nothing to speak up for the rights of photographers, who will?

    For PSS to say "We do not have the legal teams to provide advise for photographers" is one thing, but to endorse something like this is another thing. It is like saying " this is OK, this is acceptable, there's nothing wrong with it ". Is that what PSS is saying? If so, than why change things with the Life Is Great competation?

    It is all right for PSS not to be able to give legal advise, but it should at least make a stand on what is the rights of a photographer and stand by them and not turn a blind eye to it.
    I get paid more shooting part time ...... damn, I should find more time to shoot part time

  2. #42
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,601

    Default

    why doesn't PSS make sure that their name isn't negatively impacted when they put down their "stamp of approval" to this competition, is a big puzzle.

    mulder said, "the truth is out there"

  3. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sORe-EyEz

    to borrow Steven Yee's quote:"It is like lottery tickets. You got the money, but it is your choice whether to get a ticket and try your luck to win big prizes. If you lose, your money is forfeited. If you win, your small investment multiply many folds."

    such a mindset will not do. i see no link in taking part in a photography competition & striking lottery/prize. if so, wad about sports competition? held in schools, locally, or international level like Olympics?
    In my opinion, one's art work is liken to one's personal asset. It is up to individual as to how they want to make use of them.

    For a serious photographer, they talk about editions, value of their works etc.

    Some photographers shoot and hope to donate them to museums. Some shoot to join competitions. Some shoot to keep the pix at home. The list goes on.

    For photo competition,sometimes, it is not just the skill, but also some streak of luck. Things one cannot control include the judges' choice, what others submit etc.

    I was in the badminton school team in the past and almost went for F&N training. I was once trained by Wong Shoon Keat. In those days with 16 hours of training per week, I play competitive badminton not just out of passion but with the hope to play for Singapore. For some reasons, I chose photography instead. same thing. The game is not just about skills, but also about consistency in form, concentration and luck.

  4. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sehsuan
    why doesn't PSS make sure that their name isn't negatively impacted when they put down their "stamp of approval" to this competition, is a big puzzle.

    mulder said, "the truth is out there"
    The interesting thing here is such rules are not found in this competition only,but also in others, local and global, especially by some bigger commercial entities. Why do so many people single this out?

    As mentioned, every organisation has their objective in organising the competition. We have to respect their rules and regulation. It is up to one individual whether to take part or not. It is hard to say if the rules are fair or not. If one thinks that the rules are not fair, then one is free not to take part and let others sweep the prizes. I also think that photographers who shoot to join competition is monitoring this thread carefully to see howmany works to "whack" and win all. Hope these comments about fairness are not decoys by these photographers.

    In PSS's stance, we are just providing resources for the judging and venue for exhibition. Full stop. HPB is a stat board and they have a legal team to do the drafting of the form. This competition is not owned by PSS. We are just supporting in terms of logistics.

    In a nutshell, I really do not understand why there is a hoo haa about this competition.

    The competition game is pretty simple. If one think it is unfair, feel free not to join and let the rest sweep the prizes. Think about it.

    Internet connection in India is not cheap. Hope my comments help to clear some doubts.

  5. #45
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    The interesting thing here is such rules are not found in this competition only,but also in others, local and global, especially by some bigger commercial entities. Why do so many people single this out?
    I concur with yqt's posts - and just because everyone does it doens't make it right. And just because it is a so called "standard" set of terms and conditions (even if it is so), doesn't prevent us from discussing about it and creating awareness so that those who choose to enter, go in with their eyes open.


    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    In PSS's stance, we are just providing resources for the judging and venue for exhibition. Full stop. HPB is a stat board and they have a legal team to do the drafting of the form. This competition is not owned by PSS. We are just supporting in terms of logistics.
    I think yqt's point is that even though PSS is not directly in charge of the competition or drafted the rules, it still has an obligation to help photographers being the leading Photography Club.

    Finally, on the part about having a legal team to do the drafting, is this your opinion or based upon fact? I only have to refer you to my previous posting on Clause 3(vi) which I quote again:

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    Also look at clause vi - it states "All particpants (sic) must ensure that permission has been obtained from their models (if any are featured in their photographs) to allow their photos to be used by HPB according to Section 7 of the Rules & Regulations." Section 7 is the indemnity clause and does not stipulate any criteria for the level of permission required or the type of use contemplated.
    In view of above, I suppose you'll now say its your opinion and not based upon fact.

  6. #46
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default

    I've browsed through several references picked up by Google when I was searching for T&Cs for photography conditions and noticed that the indemnity clause 7 or something similar doesn't appear in any of the references that I've seen. Perhaps others who are more experienced in competitions may like to comment whether Clause 7 is a "standard clause"?

    The interesting thing here is such rules are not found in this competition only,but also in others, local and global, especially by some bigger commercial entities. Why do so many people single this out?

  7. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    I've browsed through several references picked up by Google when I was searching for T&Cs for photography conditions and noticed that the indemnity clause 7 or something similar doesn't appear in any of the references that I've seen. Perhaps others who are more experienced in competitions may like to comment whether Clause 7 is a "standard clause"?
    Saw the same clause in Epson and LTA's competition. Hope that helps.

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    SGee
    Posts
    1,572

    Default

    it is tis kind of T&Cs tt discourage me from joining photography competitions. if got competition i jus shoot but dun submit my pics. i can still sorta compare my pics w/ d winning entries if they r published or exibited...

    ttz 1 way of guaging my level of photography lo...

    like i did not win any prize 4 photos submitted 2 NLB's some time back. de 1 at Stamford tt was torn down? at least i got a free book as a token of appreciation (ttz so sweet, rite?!), hehee...

  9. #49
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default

    Oki, thanks for the clarification.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zookeeper
    Saw the same clause in Epson and LTA's competition. Hope that helps.

  10. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    In PSS's stance, we are just providing resources for the judging and venue for exhibition. Full stop. HPB is a stat board and they have a legal team to do the drafting of the form. This competition is not owned by PSS. We are just supporting in terms of logistics.

    In a nutshell, I really do not understand why there is a hoo haa about this competition.

    The competition game is pretty simple. If one think it is unfair, feel free not to join and let the rest sweep the prizes. Think about it.
    My take on this....

    I do agree to Liew's POV that if you juz shoot and keep, your pics are economically worthless less self gratification.

    For PSS, I had thought that in the case of last GE - "live is great" competition, improvements were made to the T&C and have thought the PSS is at least more active in safeguarding the photographer's interest.

    Even if PSS puts a full-stop on providing resources for limited function (only after steven's explaination here), the PSS stamp there dosen't state so, as such what about other photo community who comes across the photo competitions "supported" by PSS? Do they have to come to CS also to know about the "full stop"? Similar to the "peanut" case recently, it might be leagally right, but preception still plays a big part.

    Even if the clauses are pretty similar for all other photo competitions, in a more developed clause, other than acknowledgements, the rights to the company are limited by time (ie 3 to 5 years from date of competition).

    And it also reminds me of another recent issues regarding AIDs awareness thingy.... only the company wins if individual interest are not properly guarded.
    Gallery | Facebook Page Spreading the Good photography.

  11. #51
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default

    The individual is always at the losing end as he does not have the resources to get lawyers to review every agreement he signs, companies would have. This problem is further aggravated by the fact that the agreement is drafted by the company and essentially offered on a take it or leave it basis, especially since the company most often has the stronger bargaining power than the individual.

    Quote Originally Posted by CYRN
    only the company wins if individual interest are not properly guarded.
    For the aids awareness, you notice that the model's hyped up "I wanna sue" thing has died down? Even her blog is shut down (connected?).

  12. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    East of Singapore
    Posts
    1,750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    The interesting thing here is such rules are not found in this competition only,but also in others, local and global, especially by some bigger commercial entities. Why do so many people single this out?
    So if it have happening locally/globally, big commercial entities have done it before, we are supose to keep quite now when HPB is doing it? Again in your own words, does it means that PSS is aware of this and they choose to turn a blind eye to it? I wander how many other competation with such T&Cs PSS have endorse.

    Again in your own words, " Why so many people single this out? " Tell me when and which competation should we speak up on if not now. Should we wait for a competation which PSS is not part of before we speak up?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    As mentioned, every organisation has their objective in organising the competition. We have to respect their rules and regulation. It is up to one individual whether to take part or not. It is hard to say if the rules are fair or not. If one thinks that the rules are not fair, then one is free not to take part and let others sweep the prizes. I also think that photographers who shoot to join competition is monitoring this thread carefully to see howmany works to "whack" and win all. Hope these comments about fairness are not decoys by these photographers.
    So it is out of respect for the org that PSS have kept quite? What about the respect and even the rights of photographer? The very photographers who upon seeing the logo of PSS is of the impression that PSS endorse this competation. Don't they deserve respect?

    Why is it so hard to say if the rules is fair or not?
    Do you think it is fair, for HPB to insist upon submition, licence and rights to the image on a perpetual basis without any futher payment? Do you think it is fair for HPB to insist that if they get sued for using the images, the photographer have to bear, without limitation, the cost HPB incurred to fight the case?
    If PSS could not make up it's mind and judge if something written in black and white is fair or not, how can they convince others that their judging of the competation is fair?

    You seem concern about the same no. of people winning too many of the prize. For your info, I do not join photo competations. People who know me knows it. In fact, outside of my work, I don't even shoot much prefering to help those who're shooting. Even if I do. So what? Winning photographers have been kown to find out who the judges are, what are their taste in photography, which judge usually have a bigger say due to his standing, in order to shoot something to suit the judges just to win prize. A friend of mine have told me before " just see who the judge is and find out their taste and half of the competation is over. " and he have lots of prizes ( some from PSS ) to show for it.
    I can sense PSS's care and concern for the competation here, maybe PSS should also show some care and concern for the photographers as well.



    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    In PSS's stance, we are just providing resources for the judging and venue for exhibition. Full stop. HPB is a stat board and they have a legal team to do the drafting of the form. This competition is not owned by PSS. We are just supporting in terms of logistics.
    Asumming that, since PSS do things diff. with the Life is Great competation, the T&Cs here are not something PSS will agreed whole heartedlly, than things are still as I've mention before, PSS is only judging and provide the venue for exhibition. It is not the one who set the T&Cs, so even if there is something wrong about it, even if the T&Cs are stacked against the copyrights of the photographers, even if PSS knows about it, even if people sees PSS's logo and get the impression that PSS is supporting/endorseing it, it will not mention anything about it. It will not stand up to set things right. PSS will not comment on the T&Cs. Is that the stance of PSS? If that is so, how can PSS claim to promote photography as a whole in Singapore? But I would say PSS have done a very good job of promoting the " process of shooting " in Singapore.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    In a nutshell, I really do not understand why there is a hoo haa about this competition.

    The competition game is pretty simple. If one think it is unfair, feel free not to join and let the rest sweep the prizes. Think about it.
    You do not understand? Well my stand is very simple, I can't stand to see the rights of photographers being abused, I can't help it but speak up when I feel that unknowingly, some photographer may have to pay a lot of money when someone else used his image and get sued for it and it really makes my blood boil when I see an org, known to be the leading photography club in SG, respected even by people outside of SG, knowing full well all this and does nothing about it, they even lend their name to the competation!
    A name that once a photographer see it, will automatically accord weight and respect to it, but do not have the will themself to stand up and fight for the rights and welfare of the very people who respected it. That is what all this about for me.
    A client once wanted me to shoot the cover of another packaging. He wanted to use it for his own packaging after some alteration to it. I told the client that I'll not do the job. He thought that I wanted more money and since he needed it urgently, offer me more money. I told him firmly but politely that I will not have any part to play in this brech of copyright. Till this day, I think I can say that my backbone is pretty straight.

    Sweep the prizes? The way you say it seems like it have happen before. Have you ever though why these photographers are able to sweep the prize? Can it be that they have join so many competation that they know the judges so well, they can shoot according to the judge's taste. Can it be that because of the T&Cs, many choose not to join? Can it be that some photographers are so piss off with PSS that when they see the PSS logo they prefer not to join? If the answers to my questions is NO because there are alot of entries, than how did you come to the impression that someone can " sweep the prize "? You have after all said " I also think that photographers who shoot to join competition is monitoring this thread carefully to see howmany works to "whack" and win all. Hope these comments about fairness are not decoys by these photographers. ". Think about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Yee
    Internet connection in India is not cheap. Hope my comments help to clear some doubts.
    I'm greatful that though the cost of internet connection in India is not cheap, you still care enough to try to tell your side of the story. There may still be some hope for PSS. It makes me wander, why is no one else from PSS coming in to give their views? What happen to the HPB "spokesperson" who post 1 post and have disappeared.

    Something a friend bounce off me last night which I hope is not true. Is PSS paid by HPB for their part in this competation? In my opinion, PSS should be paid. PSS have a building to run, stuff cost to cover and bills to pay. It should charge for the use of the venue for the judging and exhibitation. But I hope that this did not cause them to turn a blind eye.

    A picture is judge by it's beauty
    A bird is judge by it's song,
    And a man is judge by his deeds.

    Think about it.
    I get paid more shooting part time ...... damn, I should find more time to shoot part time

  13. #53

    Default

    I read, I understand............I listen, I comprehend.

    In life, we are blessed with choice...........if we like something we go for it, else we just stay away

  14. #54

    Default

    PSS. I LONG TIME GIVE UP LIAO.............
    Eat breath LIVERPOOL!!!

  15. #55
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The 3rd Rock
    Posts
    1,269

    Default

    Have one fundermental question to ask. What is the mission of PSS in the photography community??
    Last edited by billpepsi; 4th August 2005 at 05:29 PM.

  16. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yqt
    Why is it so hard to say if the rules is fair or not?
    Do you think it is fair, for HPB to insist upon submition, licence and rights to the image on a perpetual basis without any futher payment? Do you think it is fair for HPB to insist that if they get sued for using the images, the photographer have to bear, without limitation, the cost HPB incurred to fight the case?
    My personal opinion on this particular clause. If we read it carefully, it's really not so lethal, as long as we make sure our images are legally clear, giving no one any reason for suing us. It's the same when we submit images for stock image libraries, we gotta make sure model release is cleared, no brand names can be seen. I do read clauses very carefully before I take part. That should be the practice, regardless of which organisation supports the competition.

    Conversely, it could potentially lethal for the organiser if they don't have this clause, as any Tom, Dick, or Harry could fake a model release and submit the image for the competition and sabo the organiser. It is common for organisers to safeguard themselves legally.

    I do have a constructive proposal to make for future organisers, instead of phrasing that clause the way it is, maybe for future contests, they can just disqualify any photo with recognisable faces and brands straightaway. That would make everyone happy regarding this clause.

  17. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    East of Singapore
    Posts
    1,750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zookeeper
    My personal opinion on this particular clause. If we read it carefully, it's really not so lethal, as long as we make sure our images are legally clear, giving no one any reason for suing us. It's the same when we submit images for stock image libraries, we gotta make sure model release is cleared, no brand names can be seen. I do read clauses very carefully before I take part. That should be the practice, regardless of which organisation supports the competition.

    Conversely, it could potentially lethal for the organiser if they don't have this clause, as any Tom, Dick, or Harry could fake a model release and submit the image for the competition and sabo the organiser. It is common for organisers to safeguard themselves legally.

    I do have a constructive proposal to make for future organisers, instead of phrasing that clause the way it is, maybe for future contests, they can just disqualify any photo with recognisable faces and brands straightaway. That would make everyone happy regarding this clause.
    Yes. I do agreed that if I'm working for someone I'll want to cover my ass as well.

    But why do HPB wants to have the copyrights for every single photo submitted? Why not just the prize winners and renego. with others which they find are usable? Anyway, is HPB so poor that they have to go to this level to build their own stock libralies? Bear in mind that they're a stat. board. If they're really so poor but are given a big job to do, than it is up to the HOD to fight for more money. Or are all of them just " yes man ". It not the army, "do and die, don't ask why", even the army don't follow that nowadays. Anyway, why must it be on a perpetual basis?

    To ask for perpetual usage of every single photo reguardless of prize winning or not. Is that right? In fact, is that proper for a stat. board to do it from a Image/PR point of view? There is at least a growing no. of people that think it cheapens the image of HPB.
    I get paid more shooting part time ...... damn, I should find more time to shoot part time

  18. #58
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default

    Perpetual is bad. Imagine one day you shoot something good, enter it in a competition. After that a lot of people want to buy your photograph or the right to use it, and a free licensee can come along and jump on the bandwagon and compete with you - after all he has the license to do anything.

    By the way, this is a hypothetical.

  19. #59

    Default

    Read the T&Cs again and again and again, still puzzle, if there is anyone competeing, do let me know, i wanna let him or her know: you good lar, i admit defeat, like that also join, wo su le ( i lose liao)................

    To PSS Mr. Steven Yee:

    If some one took a very good pic, the image got big impact on our society, everyones loves it, the photographer got famous, HPB very please, then suddenly, the third party which appear in the photo sue HPB, can you let me know what will the photographer bear?

    Alot of ppl out there don't read good english, and i am sure that your answer here will made ppl read the T&Cs more carefully, or consult other ppl who commands better english.

    Bear in mind that this is a open forum. Be careful on what you post here.

    Regards
    Smurfman
    Eat breath LIVERPOOL!!!

  20. #60
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default

    I'm not PSS Steven Yee, but just my humble view (which should not be taken as authoritative and Mr Yee should confirm or deny).

    The answer is in Clause 7. The Photographer will have to indemnify HPB Promotion Board and its associates (whatever this may mean) from and against any claim, demand or action by a third party and is liable to pay all cost and expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees and related costs of litigation) suffered or incurred by HPB or associates in connection with such claim, demand or action.

    The only condition is tha the claim MUST be based on a claim that the Photographer's work violates, infringes or misappropriates any copyright and/or intellectual property rights of such third party.

    Quote Originally Posted by smurfman
    To PSS Mr. Steven Yee:
    If some one took a very good pic, the image got big impact on our society, everyones loves it, the photographer got famous, HPB very please, then suddenly, the third party which appear in the photo sue HPB, can you let me know what will the photographer bear?

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 123458 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •