[Lightstalkers] Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:54:20 +0000

I was approached by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation about a possible assignment. It sounds interesting but there is one stipulation that I can't accept. They say: "In our standard agreement, the foundation owns the images -- this is work for hire -- but you would be able to use the images in your portfolio or other forums of self-promotion, but could not sell or use them for other clients". I find this somewhat disingenuous, given that Mr. Gates other interest-the one that pays his bills- has been fighting for intellectual property rights in the courts for some time now. I myself have refused to sign 'work for hire" contracts. Has anyone done work for their foundation but on different terms? Would I be able to negotiate some kind of embargo period, where I retain copyright but don't use the images until six months after the shoot? Any experiences or insight would be appreciated. Keith Dannemiller

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:29:28 +0000

Just tell him for $10 Million he can have it, or make that $100 Million. Your images, your business, your life, negotiate what you think you are worth and if they think lesser of you, walk. Last heard slavery was abolished in the US, at least that's what the government claims. What are you afraid of? Tell them to throw in a lifetime of software and hardware from Apple, and you might think about it.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:35:20 +0000

Seriously, like you wrote, "their standard agreement". It's your business, you decide how to run your business, how much to charge or what's acceptable for you, your agreement, two sides agree, not one sets the terms. What standard? They are wanting to do business with you, good thing for you. Good luck. Jeez,.....

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:51:34 +0000

Keith, Although I don't know who commissioned the work, James Nachtwey shot Bill and Melinda Gates recently, and I'm sure VII didn't make any such concessions. Know your worth my friend!

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 15:24:58 +0000

Here are a few thoughts... First, they are upfront about this and apparently aren't hiding anything. Second, don't shoot yourself in the foot. This foundation is probably one of the wealthiest on the planet and the work resulting from this job might pay off in the long run. Third, don't forget about the possible connections made from this. I say do it.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:21:50 +0000

David - that sounds a bit like the old "I'm just going to do this one on the cheap so I can get a foot in the door" line. The problem is there is no evidence to reasonably expect the prospect of more work and that this is any more than a once off. Plus, if more work were to come up Keith has set a precedent he won't really be able to correct. It would then start costing him a lot in the long term. If you want to buy a single roll of toilet paper, you pay retail. If you want to buy one thousand rolls of toilet paper, yeah, you should expect some concession like a bit off the top and maybe free delivery. But you don't get one roll home delivered because the toilet paper company hopes you'll be back for more in the future. Keith - one option is to do the work for them, agreeing to surrender your copyright, but at a cost. Explain that this is because (a) you lose any future revenue from resales, and (b) there's no license to restrict them from using the pictures on, say a global advertising campaign, so they can hardly expect to pay PR rates. Also, remember you're not dealing with Bill Gates and his wealth. You're dealing with a PR company they're outsourcing to, and they have a budget like anywhere else, so I would approach it as you would any other big business client. Frankly, I think it's also pretty important not to get ripped off by the world's richest man. :)

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:38:53 +0000

Wade, thanks for pointing out what I did not see.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 17:21:06 +0000

Sell your copyright to Bill Gates,mmm,glad you didn,t sign Keith,too many photographers are selling their soles,personally I don,t think it is worth it to get your foot in the door.

Good on you.

Would you want to get your foot in that type door anyway?

Wade,s comments are well justified,and well worth others taking note of.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 18:57:17 +0000

You dont sign away your rights like this. but you can still investigate whether a different arrangement can be had. I was curious abut the work they are doing on Malaria, since this is a story I would like to do, but if they expect all images to be handed over to them in this way, I will find another means of funding the project. And dont kid yourself: there are always other means.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 21:36:41 +0000

I was going to wait until tomorrow am to respond to the rep from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation but she called me this evening to ask if I had received her message. We had a friendly but firm conversation. I let her know from the start that I had drawn the line in the sand a long time ago vis-a-vis 'work for hire' contracts. I told her that I haven't worked for The New York Times for the last five years basically because their contract is a photographer-rights-negating WFH contract. She said she had heard the same thing from a lot of photographers about the foundation's contract, but she was dealing with lawyers who would not budge an inch. I nonetheless ran some possible scenarios past her (embargo period instead of WFH; a buyout in the range of $20,000) which were all shot down. Her concern about my reusing the images whenever, was the foundation's relationship with their clients. They have to guarantee to these people that their image will not show up anywhere else except in foundation publications. I said I understood that. But I admit I almost laughed out loud when she mentioned that the foundation was non-profit. I also tried to contrast the rights-protective policies of Gates' other ventures--Corbis and Microsoft-- to the rights-grabbing policy of the foundation, but I don't think she exactly got my point. So anyway, my work will not grace the pages of Mr.Bill's foundation. I guess there's worse things can happen. Ni modo. Siempre hay mañana. Keith Dannemiller

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:22:53 +0000

Hard one,but good on you Keith,think your asking price was more than reasonable seing they are going to own your images for ever.

Love the bit about none -profit,this is associated with Bill Gates,mmm,Bill working for no - profit,doesn,t seem write does it.

Re: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Thu, 16 Mar 2006 04:30:45 +0000

"They have to guarantee to these people that their image will not show up anywhere else except in foundation publications. I said I understood that."

Frankly I dont entirely understand that. (And by the way, Keith, well done.) I think the alternatives you offered here were perfectly fine, and I dont really see that any foundation has to circumscribe the use of its imagery any more than this. In fact, just as one sees in the magazine world, your pix might run in one mag, but if the story is a big one, it may well run in other mags, either simultaneously or subsequently, around the world, and by so doing it calls more attention to the issue at hand -- which I thought was the real point of the whole thing. If the Gates foundation wants publicity and wants to eradicate Malaria (or whatever), then a shotgun approach, image-wise, can only help to focus more attention on their efforts, regardless of whether the images are seen only on their website or in their publication. Does it really matter if the imagery is seen elsewhere in addition to their organs, if in the end they serve to make people aware of a particular issue and inevitably martial more support for the projects that the original NGO undertakes? It seems a little paranoid or controlling to say the least. When Salgado did his book on polio for example, those pix appeared in numerous places and that was all to the good.