V
vince123123
Guest
Of course, for that extra effect, you're probably going to have to spend about 10x the cost of the letter of demand 
Photos taken by you, appearing in publications without your consent?
- Thread starter Sausage
- Start date
- Status
Of course, for that extra effect, you're probably going to have to spend about 10x the cost of the letter of demand
everyone knows a letter of demand is not useful at all...why bother to write one?
well, you write for the sake of writing, so when you employ a lawyer, the lawyer can use it and apply for court summon.
So there're 3 layers here:
1. Publisher - got article from contributor
2. Contributor - an external organization from the publisher; wrote article and used my photos, which were 'contributed' by 'a photographer'
3. 'A photographer' - unknown identity as the article was written long ago. How to track him down now? Please don't tell me BayTSP.
I'm going to give the publisher the benefit of the doubt seeing as they're rather new to the field and they did contact me ASAP. But then personally I think the contributor should have screened all articles and included credit in the photos too, before sending it up for publication.
As it happened, there were no credits whatsoever in the article; none for the article, none for the photos. So that means even if the unknown photographer had genuinely sent his own photos, they should've credited him unless he declined.
Basically I still feel nothing can be done now, but the question still remains; how to prevent this in future?
1. Include watermark - can be removed
2. Post tiny photos + lower dpi - possible but aesthetically lacking
1. Publisher - got article from contributor
2. Contributor - an external organization from the publisher; wrote article and used my photos, which were 'contributed' by 'a photographer'
3. 'A photographer' - unknown identity as the article was written long ago. How to track him down now? Please don't tell me BayTSP.
I'm going to give the publisher the benefit of the doubt seeing as they're rather new to the field and they did contact me ASAP. But then personally I think the contributor should have screened all articles and included credit in the photos too, before sending it up for publication.
As it happened, there were no credits whatsoever in the article; none for the article, none for the photos. So that means even if the unknown photographer had genuinely sent his own photos, they should've credited him unless he declined.
Basically I still feel nothing can be done now, but the question still remains; how to prevent this in future?
1. Include watermark - can be removed
2. Post tiny photos + lower dpi - possible but aesthetically lacking
sometimes 1,2 & 3 is the same layer...
now, i think only 2 layer, 1 & 2, but your main concern is only 1, cos whatever things, just 1 owe you a direct explanation. 2 owes 1 an explanation... so whatever between them is not your problem, you just hoot 1, the rest they go settle.
dun fall into their taiji trap... THIS IS CLUBSNAP!!!! :bsmilie:
yah lah
the reason why I know they're not 1 single entity is because 2. called me up, and I know 2. from some years back.
2. is definitely not part of 1.
the reason why I know they're not 1 single entity is because 2. called me up, and I know 2. from some years back.
2. is definitely not part of 1.
so in the end, u not going to do anything, then this 1 like... :think: what u trying to do ar?
cos 2 is your fren, u hoot 1, 1 hoot 2, 2 beh song u, then how? then no hoota!!! :devil:
2 is not my fren
just an acquaintance
but still want to know how to reduce instances like this in future
just an acquaintance
but still want to know how to reduce instances like this in future
you can't, only by educating public will this kinda event seize occurence
(extracted from XEDO, 2007, Xedo vs AnimefansUnited)
write a letter of demand
1. demand that they cease and desist
recall all printed copies and stop using your photos.
you case is with the publisher
the publisher will have a case with the contributor and the contributor will have a case with "a photographer"
you only write to the publisher.
make sure that you give them a deadline to reply and send the letter of demand via registered mail.
this is your first step.
since they will not recall the printed copies, then you reply to them with an offer to sell them the copyright or terms of usage. decide on an amount that you are comfortable with.
then double it.
they will want to neg the fees, this will give you some room for ngo.
make all corrospondence via registered mail, this is proof.
or the easy way out is to engage a lawyer and sue the publisher, ask the lawyer if you can also sue "a photographer"
take the money and buy new equipment for yourself
Does not matter, benefit of the doubt of not. To preserve your rights, you need to take action against the publisher.
As long as you have the original raw files, full res, you can proof your ownership of the images and all rights that come with the ownership.
If you are not taking action against the publisher, then all this talk is nonsense.
It is the publisher's responsibility to check all copyright releases.
if u want to be rewarded for the efforts, pls take the necessary steps to protect your right, no 1 will bother to give u due rewards/ return when u dun ask for it. this n the rest of other things is the same.
otherwise , u will shoot for free, n no given any due credits or monetary rewards.
otherwise , u will shoot for free, n no given any due credits or monetary rewards.
V
vince123123
Guest
Not necessarily, there are many pple who pay up or give up after a letter of demand is issued.
See the Odex case - and that is not even using a lawyer's letter of demand, but the company's.
I've also seen some other cases where a lawyer's letter of demand did the trick.
Of course, there are people who may choose to ignore it, but they would do so at their peril.
Its like saying, if I know a nuclear bomb sure can kill someone, why do I bother using a gun or knife to begin with? Because the gun or knife is cheaper and easier, and if that doesn't work, then you go on to the bomb.
See the Odex case - and that is not even using a lawyer's letter of demand, but the company's.
I've also seen some other cases where a lawyer's letter of demand did the trick.
Of course, there are people who may choose to ignore it, but they would do so at their peril.
Its like saying, if I know a nuclear bomb sure can kill someone, why do I bother using a gun or knife to begin with? Because the gun or knife is cheaper and easier, and if that doesn't work, then you go on to the bomb.
maybe it works cause its company vs one person
but in this case its one person vs company...will not work at all...
write a letter of demand
1. demand that they cease and desist
recall all printed copies and stop using your photos.
you case is with the publisher
the publisher will have a case with the contributor and the contributor will have a case with "a photographer"
you only write to the publisher.
make sure that you give them a deadline to reply and send the letter of demand via registered mail.
this is your first step.
since they will not recall the printed copies, then you reply to them with an offer to sell them the copyright or terms of usage. decide on an amount that you are comfortable with.
then double it.
they will want to neg the fees, this will give you some room for ngo.
make all corrospondence via registered mail, this is proof.
or the easy way out is to engage a lawyer and sue the publisher, ask the lawyer if you can also sue "a photographer"
take the money and buy new equipment for yourself
first...you got to make sure a Writ of summon is servced to them...
two...how much u going to claim in damages...
three...do you have the money to fight against them...
four...do you emontionally think you can handle the case against them?
five...do you have the time?
I put watermark dead smack in the centre of the photo. Then people start criticizing my watermark more than the photo itself. I get lower ratings in forums.
In my case it's like saying a mansion like White House is ugly cos it has a large fence around it. Or a pretty lady holding a gun is ugly. It's for sake of security.
So now? I made my watermark very light. Now I'm worried of my photos being leeched too. Some people think photographer is just someone who presses the biggest button on the camera, or that a photo is just a photo. Or perhaps they leeched it thinking that the owner would never know. Something wrong with ethics here.
In my case it's like saying a mansion like White House is ugly cos it has a large fence around it. Or a pretty lady holding a gun is ugly. It's for sake of security.
So now? I made my watermark very light. Now I'm worried of my photos being leeched too. Some people think photographer is just someone who presses the biggest button on the camera, or that a photo is just a photo. Or perhaps they leeched it thinking that the owner would never know. Something wrong with ethics here.
those who copied photos are putting themselves in deep trouble, why ?? becos firstly they got no skills to shoot that kind of photos and they advertise to tell pple this is their standard.. when the day comes, they are going to be cursed by their clients. People pay money to ask u get that results !
Moral of the story : Learn to shoot your own lah... if not wait u will be so paiseh !!
V
vince123123
Guest
Can you 100% say that it wouldn't work? That ALL individuals who engage lawyers to issue letters of demand will get them ignored by a company?
Well, I don't know In any case, it is always good practice to do so.
In some cases (I don't know if this is one of them), the issuance of notice before instituting proceedings may be a relevant factor in the consideration of a costs award during the actual trial itself.
In any case, it is really up to you If you think it won't work, then don't send lor . I'm just sharing my experiences of having seen it work .
Well, I don't know
In any case, it is always good practice to do so. In some cases (I don't know if this is one of them), the issuance of notice before instituting proceedings may be a relevant factor in the consideration of a costs award during the actual trial itself.
In any case, it is really up to you
If you think it won't work, then don't send lor . I'm just sharing my experiences of having seen it work .- Status
Similar threads
