All times in Pacific Time Zone
Latest PJM ExclusivesIs the Thrill of Obama Gone? An ?Independent? Al-Dura Commission in France? Don?t Hammer Obama for ?Refining? Iraq Stance Yes, Virginia, There Is a Special Ed Bounty Jesse Helms 1921-2008 America?s Future Hangs in the Balance
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
Related PJM LinksMcCain Turning Tables on the NY TimesTurning The Tables On Telemarketers,Turning the TablesTables Turned In Anthrax ProbeStalk the stalkersThe cavalry never cameSubscribe |
Turning the Tables on the Associated Press
March 24, 2008 1:10 AM
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
The life of a blogger will occasionally resemble that of Buffalo Bill Cody’s stories of old. And, much like the lead-slingers of times long past, we sometimes get nicked. For the past year and a half, I’ve been writing Snapped Shot, a blog that focuses on providing commentary, analysis, and the occasional exposé on professional photojournalism. Looking through the product of the photo newswire services daily and pointing out anything that seems out of the ordinary. Looking for possible counterfeiting in Lebanon. The ever-raging Rage Boy. Mystery missiles, unfired bullets, and playground munitions (oh my). All in all, it’s proven to be quite an entertaining hobby to keep my spare time occupied, and has introduced me to a terrific bunch of people. Then, one day, a volley of proverbial bullets appeared on my porch, neatly wrapped in a FedEx envelope. The label said it all, the gunslinger having put their return address ever so neatly on the envelope. The Associated Press had sent me a friendly little care package. The counsel for the Associated Press had fired the first warning shot, informing me that it was their opinion that Snapped Shot was in violation of their copyright. The violation “Frequent and systemic,” they said. In fact, they said that I was so bad that they were going to forget all of their past condemnations of Abu Ghraib, and book me for the next flight over that way. Okay, so I may have made up that last part. Now, not having access to legal staff of my own—or the local Sheriff, for that matter—my first order of business was to try and assuage the gunslingers. I immediately took the site offline, along with every last photograph that was on there (including those that were my own). I posted a notice that the AP content had been removed from the website, and hunkered down for an anxious weekend worrying about subpoenas and other not-so-hobbylike things. To make a long story short, after going back and forth with some experts regarding the AP’s notice, I discovered that the process of disputing their warning letter would likely lead me to court, whether I was in the right or not. Did I mention that I don’t have a lawyer? True, number of the world’s second-oldest profession had written to offer their kindest advice, but most who wrote were unable to be of direct assistance. It looked like I was outgunned by a long shot. In the old Westerns, the lone fighter would usually have single-handedly taken on the black hat-clad bad guys, and emerged victorious. The problem with trying this approach in the digital age is that the aforementioned bad guys have all of the guns. The lone ranger, on the other hand, is merely armed with a keyboard and a cup of coffee. This makes the odds here somewhat less hopeful. So, in the end, the only choice I really had was to cooperate with their demands, ensure that all of their content was removed from Snapped Shot, and hope for the best. “The best” being that this lone fighter gets to live to tell the story, of course. After all, I do have to put this “mere” keyboard to good use, don’t I? After writing back to their legal team and informing them that I would cooperate with their demands, they agreed not to pursue the matter any further. This left me with a website that was largely threadbare, considering that much of the discussion to date had revolved around the visual aspect of the news wire service. But, armed with my trusty keyboard, I think I’m going to manage. A week or so later, as I was getting into the swing of painting my pictures with words rather than hanging them in the digital saloon, I noticed that the press at large, including my fresh new acquaintances in the Associated Press, seemed to have stepped in a touch of a quandary. As it was described, there was a certain woman who was involved in a certain New York scandal who seemed to have had some of her pictures reproduced by some very major news services. Copyright experts asked about this apparent misappropriation of pictures noted that the newswires were walking in “dangerous waters”—a phrase which seems to be a common greeting amongst Copyright lawyers—by publishing her photos. These services were accused of taking something of tangible value and redistributing it for profit, without her or her photographers’ consent. Hmm, that’s funny. Other than the “for profit” part, isn’t that exactly what they accused me of doing? Interestingly enough, not every news service was enticed by the easy pickings on Ms. Ashley Dupre’s MySpace page. An internal European Pressphoto Agency report stated, “We refused to use these photos for legal and ethical reasons,” and that the republication of her photos might, as they describe it, “have some repercussions for those who were using these images.” A shining example of the fine art of understatement. Dupre’s legal counsel issued a press release on the matter within hours, putting every news agency that used the photos on notice that he’d be pursuing them for damages from the supposed destruction in resale value of her photographs, and he would work to ensure that “her likeness” is protected. Now, it’s entirely possible that he’s trying to divert attention from the young lady’s alleged crimes, which is generally the lawyerly thing to do. Regardless, the delicious irony of a multinational corporation being charged with the very breach that it had just gotten finished charging a lone blogger with was not lost on me. While it’s amusing to see the tables get turned on the wire services, things remain unchanged for this lone fighter. I’ll still be here, watching the black hats with a steely gaze, waiting for the moment where it’ll be safe for me to ride off into the sunset. It’s what the Duke would want. Or was it Dick Cheney? Brian C. Ledbetter is the owner, operator, resident extremist of Snapped Shot, a blog dedicated to the observation, analysis, and critique of the professional photo news wire services. ———
Return to Pajamas Media homepage Related PJM LinksMcCain Turning Tables on the NY TimesTurning The Tables On Telemarketers,Turning the TablesTables Turned In Anthrax ProbeStalk the stalkersThe cavalry never cameLatest PJM ExclusivesIs the Thrill of Obama Gone? An ?Independent? Al-Dura Commission in France? Don?t Hammer Obama for ?Refining? Iraq Stance Yes, Virginia, There Is a Special Ed Bounty Jesse Helms 1921-2008 America?s Future Hangs in the BalanceComments (6)Keith :Sassenach :Thanks for hanging in there. Of course, we all know that this isn't really about copyright -- it's about who's getting caught in lies and "creative editing." It would be great if you would enable Snapshots (snap.com), which allows users to preview links by rolling their cursor over them. Brian C. Ledbetter :Keith—I'm so sorry to hear about your trouble! The Associated Press charges money for access to their photography news wire, so in a sense, they make money on any picture that is transmitted by them. Furthermore, if it's not "flagged" for editorial-only use, they also make money on the resale of the picture for anyone who licenses it through their AP Images resale service. Have you been working with an IP lawyer on getting them to address your complaint? Having a big gun on your side of the table would probably help matters move along more smoothly... Sassenach—Great idea! I'll see if I can incorporate that feature into the site as soon as I get caught up with everything else over here! :) Respectfully yours, JohnMc :Brian, You might want to contact the EFF. From time to time they take on cases like yours in the public interest. And I would think your critique of photojournalistic content would fall under the provisions of Fair Use. You differ from Dupree in two critical aspects: 1) The content as utilized by AP by its very posting is now public not private. So long as you continue to critique the photos and not use them for personal gain you should prevail. That is copyright law. 2) You differ from Dupree in that you operate in the public realm with public content. Dupree on the other hand has not relinquished her rights to her property and quite honestly she has not sought being a public figure it was thrust on her. Contact EFF see if they are interested. Bill Quick :It's pretty simple. AP has lots of money and lawyers, and so they figure they can get away with whatever they want to do: Shut down impecunious bloggers for "stealing" their IP, then turn around and steal somebody else's IP. Anything is possible with enough money, clout, and legal representation. mark simon :It gets worse with AP overseas. I am with Apple Daily, we are the second largest paper in HKG and largest in Taiwan. If we had a dollar for everytime we get ripped off by AP or Reuters, who have Chinese speaking staff reading papers and then doing a simple translation without giving credit life would be good. AP is not a company, it is an "org" with no one shareholder exercising control, hence the ethical framework is hard to control. Good luck to you all. Comments have been archived for this page. |
PajamasXpress
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
The Editors @ PJMOmar & Mohammed Fadhil - Baghdad José Guardia – Barcelona Aaron Hanscom - Los Angeles Glenn Reynolds - Knoxville David J. Rusin - Philadelphia Roger L. Simon - Hollywood Allison Kaplan Sommer - Tel Aviv Michael Weiss - New YorkBlogrollPJ BloggersA Blog for All Ace of Spades HQ Acute Politics Advice Goddess An Unsealed Room Anchoress A Second Hand Conjecture Asymmetric Austin Bay Balloon Juice Barcepundit Belmont Club Big Picture BizzyBlog Black Five Brainster! Brothers Judd Brutally Honest Chequer Board of Nights & Days Cinnamon Stillwell Classical Values Confederate Yankee Daily Brief The Daily Gut Daimnation! Daniel Drezner Dean's World Drink This Dr. Sanity Ed Driscoll Egoist EU Referendum EU Referendum 2 Fausta’s Blog Gates of Vienna Gay Patriot Gleeson Bloglomerate GOP3 The Hill Chronicles Horsefeathers Hot Air Hud's Blog-o-Rama IMAO In From The Cold Instapundit Iraq the Model Jihad Watch Jawa Report Jules Crittenden Kesher Talk Liberal College Kid Libertas Little Green Footballs Manolo Manuel L. Quezon III Marathon Pundit Matthew Hall Michael J. Totten's Middle East Journal Michelle Malkin Neocon Express Neo-Neocon One Cosmos Only Redhead in Taiwan Pierre Legrand's Pink Flamingo Bar PoliGazette Professor Bainbridge Protein Wisdom Publius Pundit Rantings of an Okie Rattler Gator Rightwing Nuthouse Roger L. Simon Say Anything Sisu Solomonia Varifrank Vodkapundit Volokh Conspiracy WebutanteOther Groovy Blogs |
Hello Brian, I'm sorry to hear about your problems with the AP. My wife and I have had a problem with them lately as well. We took a picture of a couple in 2006 for a magazine that my wife and I did not work for. We were asked by them to take their photo for a story coming out, and their staff photographer was not available. Now after a year and a half the couple is missing and their picture is all over the internet and television without our permission. AP said they got permission from the magazine that requested us to take their photo, but that magazine didn't have written permission from us, and never contacted us to obtain permission. Now the AP will not get back to us. They say it is between the magazine and us, and it is not their problem.
They will not return our calls or emails either. Is AP making money from this photo that they did not have permission to distribute?
Mar 24, 2008 05:24 AM