<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>[Lightstalkers] Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
    <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website</link>
    <description>An entire Lightstalkers thread via RSS/XML.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <item>
      <title>Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
      <description>Hi all, Could anyone tell me what to charge a smallish hotel to use a photo of mine on there website?  And, oh, btw-found it stolen....
I will send them a note with a bill :)  Thanks.  Sarah
</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:57:10 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
      <description>Good luck, considering the image was lifted in the first place. If the image contained copyright information in the metadata, and if it is a U.S. hotel, they might be persuaded to pony up some cash, but most likely will just remove it from the website.

Even if you had the appropriate copyright info in the metadata, if the image had not been registered with the U.S. copyright office PRIOR TO ANY publication, including being posted by you on the internet, you have little legal recourse. See: http://www.nppa.org/professional_development/business_practices/copyright.html

From what I understand, a work is not copyright protected until it is registered by the creator prior to publication (blogs, Lightstalkers, any print or electronic public forum constitutes publication). However, it is copyright protected if someone else publishes it before the creator does.

That said, $250 - $500 might be a reasonable amount to ask.
-Skippy</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:59:54 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website#114634</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
      <description>Not quite true.

You might come across a picture somewhere on the internet without copyright asserted - this doesn't protect you if you then go and pinch it. But you're right that getting any money out of someone in the US means pre-registration. But as the copyright holder is still the copyright holder, they can demand it be removed.

If you don't get anywhere you can tell their website host and they will deal with it because they're legally vulnerable too (go to whois.com and type in their web address - it'll give you the domain name provider and you contact them about it).

Good luck.

Wade.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:46:57 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website#114639</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
      <description>Thanks, it's a hotel in Guatemala, may even be American owned...the photo was taken off flicker- but is copyright-ed. Just because it is on flickr does not mean it can be stolen, no credit either.  They can take the photo down if they do not want to pay. 
Thanks for the info.   I just want to make a point...</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:11:33 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website#114640</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
      <description>Excellent point, Wade. I was unclear about ownership:  whether copyright info is indicated on or with the image or not, it remains the property of the owner. My intended point was only that if it was indicated it might be easier to pursue restitution.

Sarah- Issuing a notice to the website host is a great idea and would probably get quicker and more effective action than going after the Guatemalan hotel, American owned or not. Send the hotel a bill along with a notice that the web host will be contacted within a certain number of days. I doubt they'll pay, but it's still important to be aggressive on these things. I'm considering putting watermarks on anything I post on the web from here on.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:36:31 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website#114649</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
      <description>Sarah

You can get a pretty good idea of what the commercial value of the image is by going to any number of
major stock photo sites (Getty,Corbis,Masterfile) and use their price calculators to determine a price
for a similar usage of one of their images.

As an example,Masterfile (which is my principal stock agent) quotes the following for a Rights-managed image:

Internet-Website promotional-Homepage-Worldwide Access-1 year    $930
Same criteria but for secondary page use is quoted at                               $670

These prices are usually used as a starting point for negociations and I don't think many clients would be paying this full amount anymore.

This pricing is also under severe pressure from Royalty free content  as many of the major players matched
Gettys pricepoint  for RF content of $49 licenses for internet use for a three month duration.




</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:57:22 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website#114655</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
      <description>a travel agency in Tajikistan jacked some photos of mine for the website... i told them to pay up or take them down. they took them down the next day... which was surprising because there isn't much I could have done otherwise.

Now, I found a photo of mine stolen by a European think tank publication (paid for by the EU)... I sent them lots and lots but they never once replied. You would think they would consider the law more than a Tajikistan tour agency! 

Funny how the under-developed thief had more respect then the first world thief. I don't you'll get any money but I bet they take the photo down and think twice before lifting an image.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:28:26 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website#114659</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
      <description>If you stuck it on Flicker there might be trouble. I don't use it so I don't know the ins and outs, but there is something in their terms about relinquishing copyright of your stuff once you upload it to them. Run a mile.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:58:48 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website#114676</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
      <description>Thanks for your help on this.  It's a never ending problem w/ the net-  and Getty's $49.00 deal didn't help....will let you know what happens.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:59:57 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website#114677</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Price for a photo on hotel website</title>
      <description>Wade, our posts did cross, even though it is on flickr, it still has a copyright.  I will look into this more.  Flickr does have a clause about linking back to the photo in Flickr-But also adding a credit...but the hotel site is a commercial site. There are other stolen photos on this site also.  It is a very nice site-so I would think who ever did it, knows about copyright.  Anyways, I will look into this more, and let you know.  Thanks again for all your help.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 01:07:30 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.lightstalkers.org/posts/price-for-a-photo-on-hotel-website#114678</link>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
