|
In the mid 1980's CBS Sports used a postcard of mine during a football game
halftime. I billed them for it. I picked a number that if they just paid it I
would not feel I could have gotten more. They didn't pay it. Letters to the CEO
and from their lawyers for a copy of the copyright certificate. Of course they
tried to talk me down to 1/3 the amount. CBS finally paid the bill and I
got $1500.00 which was not chicken feed to me in the mid 1980's. CBS had deep
pockets.
I had an experience earlier where I sold a picture at a street festival and
the person sent it into Camera 35 magazine as his work. He told them it was
taken from a bridge. He got $35.00 for it. At that point I decided it wasn't
worth the effort to collect especially since the copyright law didn't provide as
much coverage.
I support the copyright going beyond the photographer life time as it makes
for easier application of the law.
I have inherited photos and slides from both my father and my aunt which
are not published. Under the old law when I publish them I can copyright them
just like a publishing company. Under the new law I get the an extra dose
of protection.
Roy
In a message dated 3/3/2009 9:13:27 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
shahjen@xxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
just saying, ownership laws aren't just geared toward protecting the big Check all of your email inboxes from anywhere on the web. Try the new Email Toolbar now! |
