ASMP » All Posts Sat, 20 Oct 2018 03:46:53 +0000 en-US <![CDATA[Reply To: Other Advocacy]]> Thu, 18 Oct 2018 03:07:52 +0000 Barry Schwartz Those who are reading this should know after David posted his note above, he sent me a private email containing a copy of the contract, and I wrote him was that there was a similar issue brought to the attention of the board that is being addressed by one of our outside counsels, a member of APA, and the member who originally brought the issue up – this dates back to February of this year, so I’m a little fuzzy on the results, but I do know communication was made directly with people working the realtors.

]]> <![CDATA[Reply To: Other Advocacy]]> Wed, 17 Oct 2018 03:23:02 +0000 David Eichler Barry, I have a particular issue that I would like to bring up with the NAR, regarding copyright. I have sent a message to Thomas Kennedy about this but have not yet heard back from him. I would be glad to take this up with them directly, in which case I would welcome any contact info you might have. If national would prefer to handle it, I would be glad to brief anyone there on the issue, which has to do with individual MLSes requiring MLS ownership of listing material, including photos, despite NAR rules prohibiting them from requiring this of their members. I think this is a matter that requires immediate attention because it will have immediate adverse affects for photographers working in the affected markets, if photographers are forced to agree to copyright transfers or loose business, and you know the rates that are common for real estate marketing photography are nowhere near adequate to compensate for transfer of copyright.

]]> <![CDATA[Reply To: Other Advocacy]]> Wed, 17 Oct 2018 01:18:00 +0000 Barry Schwartz We have not had much luck over the last few years with the AIA, since the leadership changed.  We have tried multiple times to restart the relationship, but for various reasons, it foundered.  As for other organizations, the Copyright Alliance, which I referenced earlier, is a very large group of organizations with similar interests in preserving the ability of creators to make a living off their intellectual property, so by default we are in concert with a large number of organizations.   Others, such as NPPA and APA, we have had considerably more direct contact with.  We’ve been discussing some contract issues with the National Associating of Realtors to get them, in at least some circumstances, to modify their contracts, or what they want to have in their boilerplate contracts, with photographers – it still, of course remains entirely up to each photographer as to how they want to deal with those – or any contracts.

The movie industry is a separate kind of issue: the standard for all productions is that photographers, like DPs, are under work-for-hire agreements.  It’s worth noting that when most photographers act as producers, including still photographers who are doing video and hiring crews, their crews are also working for them under a work-for-hire basis – there are lots of good reasons, and not just the traditions involved, that make that the case.

]]> <![CDATA[Reply To: Other Advocacy]]> Tue, 16 Oct 2018 23:34:11 +0000 David Eichler Barry, that didn’t entirely answer my question, and perhaps I did not put it clearly enough. I am interested in knowing what sort of advocacy the ASMP has been doing besides addressing copyright matters with the government. Any other business matters with government personnel or entities? And, any business matters, including copyright with private organizations? I am especially interested in advocacy with other trade organizations whose members are users of photos. I know the ASMP has done some work with the American Institute of Architects, and has jointly produced some publications with them. But what about, say, the American Society of Interior Designers, the National Association of Realtors, or and trade organizations associated with graphic design, advertising or the movie industry? Thomas Kennedy sent me a short response stating that the ASMP has had some contact with some of these private organizations, but I’d like to know some specifics of the substance and results of any discussions, whether regarding intellectual property rights or other business matters.

]]> <![CDATA[Reply To: 750 images in an Unpublished © Registration – New Rules!]]> Fri, 20 Jul 2018 21:36:42 +0000 lisacorson I just registered images with the Copyright Office directly for the first time this year. (I’ve made other registrations through Image Rights. So much easier, but more expensive). Aside from the 750 image limit being a huge problem–one which I heard nothing about (including from ASMP) until it was set in stone–the new process for listing all file names is totally convoluted. Making an excel doc with the list isn’t a huge problem. But they also “recommend” you enter all those file names again in the ECO application. Does anyone know why? How is it a risk to skip this process? There’s a character limit for each entry, so I had to break mine down into 16 entries. For each entry, you have to select the # of files & the month published (this is already on your excel doc). And then you have to paste or type the file names into a tiny window. I could go on. But basically it’s difficult to break the lists down to fit into that character limit & then it’s impossible to fully see what you’ve entered.

There’s a survey about the process, which I took, and it says that they’re trying to improve the system & asked if I would participate in a user study. Is ASMP involved in this? It really needs to be more user friendly. On top of the fact that I was nearly screaming by the end of it, there’s a huge risk for making mistakes in the application process, which I fear could be used against me by some infringer in the future to invalidate a registration.

]]> <![CDATA[Recent Copyright Infringement Case]]> Sun, 01 Jul 2018 20:03:01 +0000 David Eichler See the judge’s ruling in this recent copyright infringement case:

I am wondering how often there are appeals of decisions in copyright infringement lawsuits and whether parties other than the copyright holder may appeal if the copyright holder does not wish to pursue the matter further. It seems to me that, if allowed to stand as precedent, the decision I cite could be detrimental to the interests of photographers.

]]> <![CDATA[New Legal aid]]> Sat, 30 Jun 2018 17:32:16 +0000 ltpug Hi My Name is Scott. I just shot an event for a festival here in Colorado for the chamber of commerce in canon city. The newspaper contacted the chamber and wanted to use my images. They used 9 or 10, and it was agreed they would be free if they gave me credit. However they never gave me credit. Images printed damage already done. So the Chamber is who I have my Usage License with, and the president of the chamber also runs the news paper, told me specifically as outlined in the license with the chamber they would give me credit. Please advise, I am a member of the ASMP and know we do have some advocacy rights with our membership, if I understood it correctly. But I am  looking for a POC, Point of Contact or someone whom I can talk to and be advised on what the next course of action for me will be.

]]> <![CDATA[Reply To: 750 images in an Unpublished © Registration – New Rules!]]> Thu, 21 Jun 2018 21:52:00 +0000 Boris_Feldblyum The US Copyright Office does not exist to insure that photographers stay in business. They do what they do because they can and because photographers are NOT represented by an organization that can effectively defend its members . When I hear that the ASMP and APA “put a good fight” my reaction is “… and the result was what exactly?”

Today is June 21st, 32 days away from the end of public comments on the NEW set of rules by which the CO wants to increase the $55 to $100. For the same 750 unpublished photographs.

See it with your own eyes at

Here is what will happen, in my opinion. Photographers, especially young ones, will register less, and be very selective in what they register on the day they submit a registration. However, they will still share or “publish” more images as time goes by. And then, one of those images will be stolen and the US Copyright Law with its mighty statutory damages provision will be out of their reach.

]]> <![CDATA[Reply To: 750 images in an Unpublished © Registration – New Rules!]]> Wed, 13 Jun 2018 19:14:32 +0000 Andy Batt Just kicking this thread again — is ASMP doing anything to restore our ability to register larger groups of images? With EVERYTHING getting more expensive, rates going down, and clients getting more demanding about paying less for photography (ie the Walmart model) — the 750 image limit to registering copyrights is essentially the USCO is putting the hurt on small business, and de-incentivizing photographers from registering their works.

I know there’s other more pressing © issues — but this one hurts every time, on every job.





]]> <![CDATA[The CASE Act Challenge: Submit a Video in Support of Small Claims Tribunal]]> Thu, 10 May 2018 00:53:43 +0000 Jacie Carter Grab your camera and join the Case Act Challenge! Submit a video telling the world why it is important for Congress to pass the CASE Act!

We need succinct videos (in the 90-second range) that say why the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act legislation would make a difference for you as an individual visual creator.  Your video should be personal and direct, and you can use information about your individual situation to make the case (no pun intended).  For example, you could describe the number of infringements you have faced in a given time period, or reference the loss of income in $$ terms or percentage terms, or how infringements could impact or have impacted your ability to control usages and/or licensing of other uses downstream.  Or simply tell the world that the rights of creators and their incredible works need to be protected and the CASE Act will protect visual creators. All issues are fair game!

View sample video from Imaging USA.

The Challenge: The chapter with the most entries (percentage of total chapter membership) will win $150! Deadline is Monday, May 21st at 11:59pm. Submit your video today so we can share your work on social media. Send a link to your video to Please make sure videos are in landscape format, and the area is relatively quiet.

If you don’t want to be the actor in your video, recruit your ASMP colleagues, your clients, your neighbors, and/or your families! Just hand them a script and hit record. The 90-second video doesn’t need to be 3-day professional production.

To up your knowledge about the Case Act, and prepare yourself or your cast for a CASE Act cameo,  go to the ASMP Small Claims Report for words and quick campaign hits! Send any questions to

We hope you will accept the challenge to help us continue the press on Congress to take action to protect visual creators!