You sold 17 million albums and you want to pay me nothing

[AlterEgo]

The lapse of manners was the groups not the photographers. To say that you want someone's work but don't find it to be worth compensation is insulting.

no, they did not use that wording, you are putting your words in their mouth to achieve a rhetorical point to paint them bad... where did they say that they "don't find it to be worth compensation" in their first proposal to him ?

[AlterEgo]

I understand the issues raised by many photographers about not getting paid.

but it was not the issue in his case... he did not happen "not getting paid" by the group - he just received a proposal - nobody stole his work and nobody was going to... there were no indication that group did something illegal or was going to do something illegal

[AlterEgo]

I agree with Mark also. I can't believe the people who ask us for free work. Realtors who had seen us at work with a room full of lights, cameras and computers asked if they could use our photos free (with credit of course) to sell a 5 million dollar house! When I gave them our price for photos they said that was too rich for their blood. Their client decided it was worth the money and they bought the photos. The house sold. I wonder if the realtor got paid in cash or if they did it for credit.

Sharon

So Sharon - did you immediately upon being asked go public and vent for all to know that realtor's name ? or you negotiated, made your position known not through Facebook and achieved the proper outcome in a business like manner w/o public tantrums ?

[Alan Klein]

I agree.

[MarkM]

Does the band previously using one of his images for an album cover without permission change your opinion of his reply?

but they didn't - moreover it was a mutually profitable business before that... so your question is a loaded one - when did you stop beating your wife ?

Again, I will suggest you read the actual piece where he points out that they did:

PS: Just so you know, this is actually an improvement on the management of your "Absolute Garbage" album where the record company just used my work without even asking. I only found this out when I went into a shop and bought a copy, which, when you think about it, has a certain irony.

[rmyers]

but they didn't - moreover it was a mutually profitable business before that... so your question is a loaded one - when did you stop beating your wife ?

Read the open letter again, or for the first time.  

[kers]

As i read it it all depends on the copyrights Pat sold in the first place.
Apparently it did not cover this use for the book. So Garbage should pay something for it...
It seems like a very simple case and Garbage facebook respons is even disliked by Garbage-fans..
(fans of garbage; flying garbage)

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Ok, so the photographer's approach was against his self-interest, against best business practices, against good manners (throwing a public temper tantrum). In one word: unreasonable.

George Bernard Shaw: "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. All progress, therefore, depends upon the unreasonable man."

[BobShaw]

Probably needs to go back and do Marketing 101. Lost opportunity. It is called Negotiation. A first offer is seldom their best offer. All sorts of things could be discussed, like a royalty per image sold. Instead he blew that opportunity and raise a red flag on future business elsewhere.

[Alan Klein]

I was going to suggest what Bob suggested.  Pope should have gone back to them and said, "OK.  I hear your "credit" offer.  But I got a family to feed too.  How about I sell you the entire copyright so you can use it anywhere and everywhere, forever?"    Then ask for, say, $1,500 or whatever.   If they felt his image was really important because it defined their famous album,  they would have offered something.  Otherwise maybe it wasn't worth more than a "credit".    The reason I suggest to offer the entire copyright, so that way the group could tell other photographers who gave them their photos for "credit" in the book only, that their deal with Pope was for the entire copyright.  That would avoid them playing favorites.

But frankly, I think Pope was really interested in just making a public case out of it, for publicity or other reasons he's not talking about,  and wasn't really interested in making money.

[Alan Klein]

Bob Shaw's marketing suggestion is even better than mine.  That is with a slight modification, all of the photographers could have been offered a royalty.  In fact, now that I think of it, that should have been Pope's retort to the group's public response.  He should have said that I understand the limited availability of funds.  So provide a royalty to me and all other photographers who provided their photos for "credit".   He would have been a hero to other photographers, given the group an out from negative publicity and maybe start a trend for similar situations.

In fact, the group still can make the offer now to eliminate the negative publicity they have received.  They should say they reconsidered the whole affair and make that happen.  Everyone will become a winner.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... the group still can make the offer now to eliminate the negative publicity they have received...

If the photographer is so wrong in your opinion, how come the group also ended up with the negative publicity?

[MarkM]

But frankly, I think Pope was really interested in just making a public case out of it, for publicity or other reasons he's not talking about,  and wasn't really interested in making money.

If you'd read the links people have provided in this thread, you would learn that he IS talking about his reasons, and that, yes, he IS more interested in making a public case than making money. Here, one more time: http://www.patpope.com/new-blog/ There's even a header that reads: "Why did I write an Open Letter?"

Also, $1500 for the copyright of a photo like this is absurdly low. Your pricing tells me you have never spent any time trying to make a living as a photographer and don't have any real-world experience with the business side — at least not at a serious level. Without this experience it is hard to really understand how prevalent the requests for free work are and how bent out of shape people get when you're not flattered by their offer. Seriously, I'm not trying to be insulting or rude, but I think it's hard to fathom the level of frustration unless you have experienced it. It is common — really common – for people to "offer" to publish work for credit and when you say you'll need to be paid, you get responses like: "get over yourself" or "your not that good" (although good enough to publish) or "thanks we'll keep looking [for free stuff]."  

Imagine trying to run a restaurant and people keep coming in, sitting down, and "offering" to eat for free as though they're doing you a favor.  The first time, you think, 'that's crazy' and maybe try to explain that you're running a business, but the hundredth time you think "get the f**k out of my restaurant and don't come back." That's really what it's like in certain sectors of this industry.

You and Bob can keep talking about Pope's lost opportunity for not trying to negotiate, but you don't get it. It's almost never worth negotiating with people who make it clear from the beginning that they are looking for free, especially when the photographer or the writer is the only one who some how didn't get a line in the budget. It is totally unethical for Garbage to try to produce and sell a photography book without budgeting for content and they were rightly called out for it.

[rmyers]

It is totally unethical for Garbage to try to produce and sell a photography book without budgeting for content and they were rightly called out for it.

There it is.  On top of unethical, it was hypocritical given their public stance on artists being paid for content / work.  They should be called out.

Also, we don't know the nature of the long term relationship between photographer and band here.  It appears Pope did their first official band photo shoot for pay.  It appears that later the band, or the band's management, used one of Pope's images for an album cover without permission.  He says he didn't know about it until he saw it in the store.  No mention about how this was resolved.  Might be more to the story than what is known from the open letter.

[Colorado David]

. . . $1500 for the copyright of a photo like this is absurdly low. . .

When I read the comment above, this is immediately what came to mind.  And then I read down and found Mark's comment.  All I can add is never sell all rights, unless you're paid handsomely and $1,500 is not near enough.  I do some work under a work for hire contract for a company that is very innovative in several different engineering disciplines.  I wouldn't have the work without the work for hire contract and I would never be able to use the images again as they are all covered by a nondisclosure agreement.  There wouldn't be any market for them anyway. But anything else I shoot, I would never sell all rights.

[Alan Klein]

If the photographer is so wrong in your opinion, how come the group also ended up with the negative publicity?

I never said the group was right.    But what I did say was that the photographer should have tried to resolve it privately at first.  I also added that the Group could have tried to resolve it after it was made public as well.  I think both parties handled the whole thing unprofessionally.  Each side damaged themselves. The Group comes off as cheapskates taken advantage of another artist.  And the photographer won't be trusted and hired by other future clients who will fear him going public if there's ever a disagreement with him. 

[Alan Klein]

Also, $1500 for the copyright of a photo like this is absurdly low. Your pricing tells me you have never spent any time trying to make a living as a photographer and don't have any real-world experience with the business side — at least not at a serious level. Without this experience it is hard to really understand how prevalent the requests for free work are and how bent out of shape people get when you're not flattered by their offer. Seriously, I'm not trying to be insulting or rude, but I think it's hard to fathom the level of frustration unless you have experienced it. It is common — really common – for people to "offer" to publish work for credit and when you say you'll need to be paid, you get responses like: "get over yourself" or "your not that good" (although good enough to publish) or "thanks we'll keep looking [for free stuff]."

I never sold a photo.  But I did have a non-photography business for twenty years.  I lost it at the end for a number of reasons.  One was I did not keep up with the times.  Things were changing and I didn't change with them.  It wasn't "fair".  That's a useless complaint.  Fans and family may agree with you.  But purchasers don't care.  Do you pay more by buying the way you use too?  Or do you shop things on the web to get the best price?  It's the way the world works.  I also had a good friend who was an illustrator his whole life.  Then came along Photoshop and programs like that and he lost 90% of his work.  He never could learn PS.  Fortunately,  he switched full time to story boards for advertisers and finished the last few years of his career doing that. 

I'm sorry that the photo industry has changed.  Prices usually go down either because the demand goes down or the supply goes up.  With digital photography and good cameras, many amateurs are pricing down the business, I suppose.  I'm sure there are those that still command good fees.  I really don't know your industry.  But I do know that you have to get past a changing market.  You have to place yourself where you can command decent fees.  Many will not be able to do that.  It's unfortunate.  Like I said, I've been there.  But you have to get over it and move on and adapt. 

Publicly trying to embarrass the purchasers because the market has changed will only damage yourself. 

[hjulenissen]

Asking someone to give you their product in exchange for something that both parties understand is worthless, is not conducting business in a professional manner. When someone asks to use your work 'for credit' they are not trying to 'conduct a business in a professional manner,' they are trying to take advantage of you.

Trying to take advantage of people seems to be what "conducting business in a professional manner" is all about? After all, "they" try to maximize profits, and so do you. The form in which negotiations happen may be different from field to field, but ultimately your company/salary/... depends on delivering something to some customer of better value and/or lower cost than your competitors.

Politely requesting someone to agree to a "bad deal" does not seem like a big deal to me.

Anytime you make someone an offer, there is a possibility that the public gets to know the details. Thus I would be sceptical about making a business offer that would make me look bad in public. This may well play out differently in creative fields than it does in e.g. plumbing.


In my country, negotiations between grocery franchises and their vendors are notoriously harsh. Our government is considering intervening and making the parties "be nice to each other". Judging from the outside, I think that is a bad idea.

-h

[hjulenissen]

In the UK the creator/copyright holder has the legal & moral right to be indentified as the author of the work. So the 'offer' of a credit as payment is not any kind of offer.
...

If I spot an interesting old lady and ask kindly if I can take her picture without paying her, am I immoral?

-h

[Nick Walker]

Probably needs to go back and do Marketing 101. Lost opportunity. It is called Negotiation. A first offer is seldom their best offer. All sorts of things could be discussed, like a royalty per image sold. Instead he blew that opportunity and raise a red flag on future business elsewhere.

A credit is called an offer! There was no 'offer' from Garbage.