Heads-Up: NAUI "Photo Contest" controversy (Rip Off)

[-hh]

Guys,

Apologies for the fast & wide blast, but just wanted to let the dive
community know that NAUI is reportedly conducting a so-called "Photo
Contest".

I became aware of this because the terms of this contest are being
discussed on the UW-Photo list - - specifically because its legal
terms are much alligned to be an unethical "Copyright Harvest" than
anything that is in any way fair to the submitter.

If I've read the crux of the discussion properly, submitting an entry
constiutes a **complete** loss of the originator's Copyright.
Similarly, technically speaking, anyone who submits any photo entry to
NAUI on this "Contest" will have to --> delete their own photo from
their own collection <-- because by submitting, they signed over their
complete ownership to NAUI.

Yow.

I agree, it is high time to go above Jed Livingstone's head about
this. Contact NAUI's president, the board, the sponsors of the
contest, etc.
Thanks to Jason and Chris for continuing to fight these sorts of
contests. I don't get it, however. What is it about photography
and our profession that makes every single contest organizer try to
get these kinds of ridiculous terms. If we were songwriters or
other kinds of artists, would there be contests that we'd have to
watch out for also? Why is it that every contest organizer
immediately tries for a rights grab? I can understand that the
concept of copyright may be foreign to most folks, but the concept
of creating art and owning that art can't be that foreign. I
believe that we have ourselves, and the masses of amateurs who
happily "get published" without renumeration, to blame in large
part. Just like all of us are responsible for the Gulf oil spill too.
Norb

Would appreciate it if someone could post a similar "flash" on
Scubaboard too.


According to their website, the current president of NAUI is Jim Bram,
***@naui.org



-Hugh

[Greg Mossman]

Guys,
-Hugh-

Have you actually read these draconian terms yourself and, if so, can
you post them? My quick search led to the following:

http://www.naui.org/justdive.aspx

which says:

"Terms and Conditions. The act of submitting photos constitutes an
agreement that the ownership of materials transfers to NAUI and that
they are free of copyright restrictions and may be published by NAUI
in Sources and any other NAUI media without further compensation. You
retain the copyrights to your photo or video, however, by entering you
give NAUI the perpetual, non-exclusive rights to use the photo in any
way, including but not limited to advertising and promotional use."

That's a far cry from what you're complaining about.

[-hh]

Post by Greg Mossman

Guys,
-Hugh-

Have you actually read these draconian terms yourself and, if so, can
http://www.naui.org/justdive.aspx
"Terms and Conditions.  The act of submitting photos constitutes an
agreement that the ownership of materials transfers to NAUI and that
they are free of copyright restrictions and may be published by NAUI
in Sources and any other NAUI media without further compensation.  You
retain the copyrights to your photo or video, however, by entering you
give NAUI the perpetual, non-exclusive rights to use the photo in any
way, including but not limited to advertising and promotional use."
That's a far cry from what you're complaining about.

Does not the phrase "... the ownership of materials transfers to
NAUI..." means that you've transferred your copyright?

If not, please explain in detail what the legal meaning (with nuances)
actually is.

And yes, I see that it also says:  "You retain the copyrights...", and
while you could argue that this statement contradicts the above
interpretation, since that phrase goes on to say that NAUI gets a
perpetual any-use right, it is very clearly again nothing less than a
Copyright land-grab phrased differently.


So please show us how it is _not_ the case that this language means
that by one way or the other NAUI isn't getting full & unlimited
rights ... for any way that they wish to use it ... forever, for
free ... on every single "Photo Contest" submission, and not even just
the winning entries: ALL of them.



-hh

[Pszemol]

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman

Guys,
-Hugh-

Have you actually read these draconian terms yourself and, if so, can
http://www.naui.org/justdive.aspx
"Terms and Conditions. The act of submitting photos constitutes an
agreement that the ownership of materials transfers to NAUI and that
they are free of copyright restrictions and may be published by NAUI
in Sources and any other NAUI media without further compensation. You
retain the copyrights to your photo or video, however, by entering you
give NAUI the perpetual, non-exclusive rights to use the photo in any
way, including but not limited to advertising and promotional use."
That's a far cry from what you're complaining about.

Does not the phrase "... the ownership of materials transfers to
NAUI..." means that you've transferred your copyright?
If not, please explain in detail what the legal meaning (with nuances)
actually is.
And yes, I see that it also says: "You retain the copyrights...", and
while you could argue that this statement contradicts the above
interpretation, since that phrase goes on to say that NAUI gets a
perpetual any-use right, it is very clearly again nothing less than a
Copyright land-grab phrased differently.
So please show us how it is _not_ the case that this language means
that by one way or the other NAUI isn't getting full & unlimited
rights ... for any way that they wish to use it ... forever, for
free ... on every single "Photo Contest" submission, and not even just
the winning entries: ALL of them.

It basically means that they can use photos you have submitted without
compensating you in any way, but you retained the copyrights, so they
have to list you are the author of the photo when they publish it - that's
it.

What is the big issue here worth discussing?

[Grumman-581]

Post by Pszemol
It basically means that they can use photos you have submitted without
compensating you in any way, but you retained the copyrights, so they
have to list you are the author of the photo when they publish it -
that's it.
What is the big issue here worth discussing?

Probably also means that they can make money off of your photographs
without compensating you in any way... Some people might have a problem
with that...

[-hh]

Post by Grumman-581

Post by Pszemol
It basically means that they can use photos you have submitted without
compensating you in any way, but you retained the copyrights, so they
have to list you are the author of the photo when they publish it -
that's it.
What is the big issue here worth discussing?

Probably also means that they can make money off of your photographs
without compensating you in any way... Some people might have a problem
with that...

That's the typical part of these Copyright Harvesting "Contests".

What makes this one a bit more unusual is not merely such rights, but
the statement that explicitly calls for the _transfer_ of ownership.


-hh

[Pszemol]

Post by Grumman-581

Post by Pszemol
It basically means that they can use photos you have submitted without
compensating you in any way, but you retained the copyrights, so they
have to list you are the author of the photo when they publish it -
that's it.
What is the big issue here worth discussing?

Probably also means that they can make money off of your photographs
without compensating you in any way... Some people might have a problem
with that...

A way of compensating you is your participation in the contest
and the chance to promote you as a photographer when you win.
With possibly some price also worth some money.

Everyone can make a desision for himself if this is worth it or not.

[Dan Bracuk]

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:01:47 -0500, "Pszemol" <***@PolBox.com>
wrote:

:What is the big issue here worth discussing?

It's scuba related.

[Pszemol]

Post by Dan Bracuk
:What is the big issue here worth discussing?
It's scuba related.

:-) Not really... it is a copyright issue, nothing to do with scuba.
It could equally well apply to the sailing or biking photo contest.

[Dan Bracuk]

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:53:47 -0500, "Pszemol" <***@PolBox.com>
wrote:

:-) Not really... it is a copyright issue, nothing to do with scuba.
:It could equally well apply to the sailing or biking photo contest.

But this thread is about an underwater photo contest sponsored by a
scuba certification agency.

It's much more scuba related than dead pets, the US prez, or the
safety of downtown Toronto.

[Pszemol]

Post by Dan Bracuk
It's much more scuba related than dead pets, the US prez, or the
safety of downtown Toronto.

No question about this... :-)

[Greg Mossman]

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman

Guys,
-Hugh-

Have you actually read these draconian terms yourself and, if so, can
http://www.naui.org/justdive.aspx
"Terms and Conditions.  The act of submitting photos constitutes an
agreement that the ownership of materials transfers to NAUI and that
they are free of copyright restrictions and may be published by NAUI
in Sources and any other NAUI media without further compensation.  You
retain the copyrights to your photo or video, however, by entering you
give NAUI the perpetual, non-exclusive rights to use the photo in any
way, including but not limited to advertising and promotional use."
That's a far cry from what you're complaining about.

Does not the phrase "... the ownership of materials transfers to
NAUI..." means that you've transferred your copyright?
If not, please explain in detail what the legal meaning (with nuances)
actually is.

No, you've merely transferred the ownership of the materials, which
would be the photo paper or CD or whatever materials contain the photo
as transmitted to NAUI. Without explicitly transferring ownership of
the copyright, you're not transferring ownership of the copyright by
transferring ownership of the materials.

Post by -hh
And yes, I see that it also says:  "You retain the copyrights...", and
while you could argue that this statement contradicts the above
interpretation, since that phrase goes on to say that NAUI gets a
perpetual any-use right, it is very clearly again nothing less than a
Copyright land-grab phrased differently.

NAUI does get a perpetual any-use right to use the photo in any way,
but they don't own the copyright. So while they may freely copy the
photo, having the right to use the photo in any way including copying
it, they don't have the right to transfer the copyright to another
entity. Therefore, they couldn't even sell the photo to a non-NAUI-
owned magazine for publication, since that magazine could only get the
rights to copy the photo for publication from the original creator.
NAUI can use it as much as it wants for its own publications, can even
sell T-shirts and bumper stickers with the photo, but only the
original owner has the right to let others copy the photo.

[-hh]

Post by Greg Mossman

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman

Guys,
-Hugh-

Have you actually read these draconian terms yourself and, if so, can
http://www.naui.org/justdive.aspx
"Terms and Conditions.  The act of submitting photos constitutes an
agreement that the ownership of materials transfers to NAUI and that
they are free of copyright restrictions and may be published by NAUI
in Sources and any other NAUI media without further compensation.  You
retain the copyrights to your photo or video, however, by entering you
give NAUI the perpetual, non-exclusive rights to use the photo in any
way, including but not limited to advertising and promotional use."
That's a far cry from what you're complaining about.

Does not the phrase "... the ownership of materials transfers to
NAUI..." means that you've transferred your copyright?
If not, please explain in detail what the legal meaning (with nuances)
actually is.

No, you've merely transferred the ownership of the materials, which
would be the photo paper or CD or whatever materials contain the photo
as transmitted to NAUI.

Or the original 35mm slide, if you're still shooting film.

Post by Greg Mossman
 Without explicitly transferring ownership of
the copyright, you're not transferring ownership of the copyright by
transferring ownership of the materials.

So essentially, all they're saying is that your submission won't be
returned. So is there any particular reason to not have simply said
that ("your submission will not be returned") instead?

Post by Greg Mossman

Post by -hh
And yes, I see that it also says:  "You retain the copyrights...", and
while you could argue that this statement contradicts the above
interpretation, since that phrase goes on to say that NAUI gets a
perpetual any-use right, it is very clearly again nothing less than a
Copyright land-grab phrased differently.

NAUI does get a perpetual any-use right to use the photo in any way,
but they don't own the copyright.  So while they may freely copy the
photo, having the right to use the photo in any way including copying
it, they don't have the right to transfer the copyright to another
entity.

How about sub-licensing it?

Post by Greg Mossman
 Therefore, they couldn't even sell the photo to a non-NAUI-
owned magazine for publication, since that magazine could only get the
rights to copy the photo for publication from the original creator.

How are they limiting themselves to only that, when they say: "... in
any way, including but not limited to..."

Post by Greg Mossman
NAUI can use it as much as it wants for its own publications, can even
sell T-shirts and bumper stickers with the photo, but only the
original owner has the right to let others copy the photo.

I'm not particularly convinced, per above. In any case, wouldn't the
legal loophole here be that any use merely needs to somehow be
"Affiliated" with NAUI in some way? For example, the sub-license that
Joe T-Shirt Man receives is 99% your image, plus a tiny "NAUI" logo
(1%) in the corner, so that it technically becomes 'NAUI Licensed'
Merchandise.


-hh

[Greg Mossman]

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman
"Terms and Conditions.  The act of submitting photos constitutes an
agreement that the ownership of materials transfers to NAUI and that
they are free of copyright restrictions and may be published by NAUI
in Sources and any other NAUI media without further compensation.  You
retain the copyrights to your photo or video, however, by entering you
give NAUI the perpetual, non-exclusive rights to use the photo in any
way, including but not limited to advertising and promotional use."
That's a far cry from what you're complaining about.

Does not the phrase "... the ownership of materials transfers to
NAUI..." means that you've transferred your copyright?
If not, please explain in detail what the legal meaning (with nuances)
actually is.

No, you've merely transferred the ownership of the materials, which
would be the photo paper or CD or whatever materials contain the photo
as transmitted to NAUI.

Or the original 35mm slide, if you're still shooting film.

Post by Greg Mossman
 Without explicitly transferring ownership of
the copyright, you're not transferring ownership of the copyright by
transferring ownership of the materials.

So essentially, all they're saying is that your submission won't be
returned.   So is there any particular reason to not have simply said
that ("your submission will not be returned") instead?

Probably not. Undoubtedly, however, some lawyer got paid to craft the
new language. It's more consistent with the language of our Copyright
Law and more specific.

§ 202. Ownership of copyright as distinct from ownership of material
object
Ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a
copyright, is distinct from ownership of any material object in which
the work is embodied. Transfer of ownership of any material object,
including the copy or phonorecord in which the work is first fixed,
does not of itself convey any rights in the copyrighted work embodied
in the object; nor, in the absence of an agreement, does transfer of
ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive rights under a copyright
convey property rights in any material object.

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman
NAUI does get a perpetual any-use right to use the photo in any way,
but they don't own the copyright.  So while they may freely copy the
photo, having the right to use the photo in any way including copying
it, they don't have the right to transfer the copyright to another
entity.

How about sub-licensing it?

I'm not sure there is such a thing in copyright law. It's not like a
physical piece of property, as copies can be produced without limit
and there is no practical way of "sub"-dividing or "sub"-letting the
right.

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman
 Therefore, they couldn't even sell the photo to a non-NAUI-
owned magazine for publication, since that magazine could only get the
rights to copy the photo for publication from the original creator.

How are they limiting themselves to only that, when they say: "... in
any way, including but not limited to..."

Because if the author intended to transfer the right to make copies,
he's transferring the copyright and the terms specifically state that
the author is not transferring the copyright. The examples of
advertising and promotional use don't imply being able to "sublicense"
copying.

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman
NAUI can use it as much as it wants for its own publications, can even
sell T-shirts and bumper stickers with the photo, but only the
original owner has the right to let others copy the photo.

I'm not particularly convinced, per above.   In any case, wouldn't the
legal loophole here be that any use merely needs to somehow be
"Affiliated" with NAUI in some way?  For example, the sub-license that
Joe T-Shirt Man receives is 99% your image, plus a tiny "NAUI" logo
(1%) in the corner, so that it technically becomes 'NAUI Licensed'
Merchandise.

They've also limited themselves with the phrase "and may be published
by NAUI in Sources and any other NAUI media without further
compensation," which implies that any NAUI might owe compensation if
it were to publish the photos anywhere else.

[Grumman-581]

Post by -hh
So essentially, all they're saying is that your submission won't be
returned. So is there any particular reason to not have simply said
that ("your submission will not be returned") instead?

Because they got lawyers involved in it... They can't justify high fees by
just writing something that *anyone* can understand...

[Alan Browne]

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman

Guys,
-Hugh-

Have you actually read these draconian terms yourself and, if so, can
http://www.naui.org/justdive.aspx
"Terms and Conditions. The act of submitting photos constitutes an
agreement that the ownership of materials transfers to NAUI and that
they are free of copyright restrictions and may be published by NAUI
in Sources and any other NAUI media without further compensation. You
retain the copyrights to your photo or video, however, by entering you
give NAUI the perpetual, non-exclusive rights to use the photo in any
way, including but not limited to advertising and promotional use."
That's a far cry from what you're complaining about.

Does not the phrase "... the ownership of materials transfers to
NAUI..." means that you've transferred your copyright?

Read the whole paragraph. In effect both parties (NAUI and you) end up
with non-exclusive but unfettered rights to the images. Not all that
bad, really. (The paragraph is poorly written, but it does allow you to
use the image as you see fit).

You always have the option to not submit anything at all and make money
with it elsewhere...

[-hh]

Post by Alan Browne

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman

Guys,
-Hugh-

Have you actually read these draconian terms yourself and, if so, can
http://www.naui.org/justdive.aspx
"Terms and Conditions.  The act of submitting photos constitutes an
agreement that the ownership of materials transfers to NAUI and that
they are free of copyright restrictions and may be published by NAUI
in Sources and any other NAUI media without further compensation.  You
retain the copyrights to your photo or video, however, by entering you
give NAUI the perpetual, non-exclusive rights to use the photo in any
way, including but not limited to advertising and promotional use."
That's a far cry from what you're complaining about.

Does not the phrase "... the ownership of materials transfers to
NAUI..." means that you've transferred your copyright?

Read the whole paragraph.

Greg already clarified that part: the 'transfer' refers to your
submission copy becoming their propetry (ie, won't be returned). As
such, you're screwed if you're still shooting film and (unwisely) sent
them your original slide.

Post by Alan Browne
 In effect both parties (NAUI and you) end up
with non-exclusive but unfettered rights to the images.  Not all that
bad, really.  (The paragraph is poorly written, but it does allow you to
use the image as you see fit).

YMMV on how "bad" it may be: afterall, 'unfettered' also means that
you may very well find your own photo having been submitted to a stock
photography outlet by NAUI. And if NAUI is willing to undercut you
by selling it at Stockphotography.com's rates, you're never going to
be able to sell it at Getty's rates.

Post by Alan Browne
You always have the option to not submit anything at all and make money
with it elsewhere...

Agreed, although the real issue here is if you're willing to let
someone else make money from your works, without you effectively ever
being compensated. Yes, there's is a proverbial 0.00001% chance of
some sort of 'contest' prize, but the problem is that these copyright
terms applies to everyone: not just the few winners, but the
99.99999% who 'lost' too.

This attachment to the losers is what makes the terms unpalatable, as
there have been many other instances of organizations running so-
called contests where the likely underlying objective was really
Copyright Harvesting.

And something to note here is that within the UW Photo community, when
other contests have been contacted regarding this sort of issue, in
many instances, they've understood the concern and accommodated by
changing their contests rules, to reduce their reach on rights being
acquired, so as to be a good community member.

The representative at NAUI has been contacted, and in a nutshell, he
essentially told the UW Photo community to go Fuck Off.

Not in so many words, of course, but given how its usually been PADI
that has earned contempt through their "Put Another Dollar In" greedy
& self-serving actions, it is a huge disappointment to find the diving
industry's supposedly respected and largest non-profit diver training
organization in the world following this path, particularly now that
they know exactly what they're doing and have chosen to not deviate
course.


-hh

[Alan Browne]

Post by -hh

Post by Alan Browne

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman

Guys,
-Hugh-

Have you actually read these draconian terms yourself and, if so, can
http://www.naui.org/justdive.aspx
"Terms and Conditions. The act of submitting photos constitutes an
agreement that the ownership of materials transfers to NAUI and that
they are free of copyright restrictions and may be published by NAUI
in Sources and any other NAUI media without further compensation. You
retain the copyrights to your photo or video, however, by entering you
give NAUI the perpetual, non-exclusive rights to use the photo in any
way, including but not limited to advertising and promotional use."
That's a far cry from what you're complaining about.

Does not the phrase "... the ownership of materials transfers to
NAUI..." means that you've transferred your copyright?

Read the whole paragraph.

Greg already clarified that part: the 'transfer' refers to your
submission copy becoming their propetry (ie, won't be returned). As
such, you're screwed if you're still shooting film and (unwisely) sent
them your original slide.

Post by Alan Browne
In effect both parties (NAUI and you) end up
with non-exclusive but unfettered rights to the images. Not all that
bad, really. (The paragraph is poorly written, but it does allow you to
use the image as you see fit).

YMMV on how "bad" it may be: afterall, 'unfettered' also means that
you may very well find your own photo having been submitted to a stock
photography outlet by NAUI. And if NAUI is willing to undercut you
by selling it at Stockphotography.com's rates, you're never going to
be able to sell it at Getty's rates.

Post by Alan Browne
You always have the option to not submit anything at all and make money
with it elsewhere...

Agreed, although the real issue here is if you're willing to let
someone else make money from your works, without you effectively ever
being compensated. Yes, there's is a proverbial 0.00001% chance of
some sort of 'contest' prize, but the problem is that these copyright
terms applies to everyone: not just the few winners, but the
99.99999% who 'lost' too.
This attachment to the losers is what makes the terms unpalatable, as
there have been many other instances of organizations running so-
called contests where the likely underlying objective was really
Copyright Harvesting.
And something to note here is that within the UW Photo community, when
other contests have been contacted regarding this sort of issue, in
many instances, they've understood the concern and accommodated by
changing their contests rules, to reduce their reach on rights being
acquired, so as to be a good community member.
The representative at NAUI has been contacted, and in a nutshell, he
essentially told the UW Photo community to go Fuck Off.
Not in so many words, of course, but given how its usually been PADI
that has earned contempt through their "Put Another Dollar In" greedy
& self-serving actions, it is a huge disappointment to find the diving
industry's supposedly respected and largest non-profit diver training
organization in the world following this path, particularly now that
they know exactly what they're doing and have chosen to not deviate
course.

Do you realize what a virtual mountain you're making out of a molehill?
You've been shown that your original premise is wrong, yet you persist
in finding unlikely evil in every corner.

You can spread the word and try to get as many people as possible to not
participate, and maybe that will cause some reflection at NAUI to
restrict their own use of the photos in their language.

But frankly, the overall value proposition here (in all ways) does not
amount to a thimble of spit in all the universe's oceans.

[-hh]

Post by Alan Browne
Do you realize what a virtual mountain you're making out of a molehill?

Perhaps you should realize that you're an utter nobody in comparison
to who participates on the UW-Photo list, where I first learned of
this.

Post by Alan Browne
You've been shown that your original premise is wrong, yet you persist
in finding unlikely evil in every corner.

Incorrect. The only part I got wrong was in the interpretation of
the property transfer of the submission.

Post by Alan Browne
You can spread the word and try to get as many people as possible to not
participate, and maybe that will cause some reflection at NAUI to
restrict their own use of the photos in their language.

Perhaps you should also read the latest from Bret Gilliam on the
shortcomings of our wonderful dive agencies.

Post by Alan Browne
But frankly, the overall value proposition here (in all ways) does not
amount to a thimble of spit in all the universe's oceans.

Which is about two thimbles more than you. Bye.


-hh

[Greg Mossman]

Post by -hh

Post by Alan Browne
Do you realize what a virtual mountain you're making out of a molehill?

Perhaps you should realize that you're an utter nobody in comparison
to who participates on the UW-Photo list, where I first learned of
this.

Since when do utter somebodies enter amateur photo contests where the
terms clearly state that the sponsor gets unlimited rights to the
photos? The only photogs that would "fall" for NAUI's devious
masterplan would be amateur hacks who would be thrilled if their shots
made the cover of NAUI's latest marketing publications.

[Cam]

Post by Greg Mossman

Post by -hh

Post by Alan Browne
Do you realize what a virtual mountain you're making out of a molehill?

Perhaps you should realize that you're an utter nobody in comparison
to who participates on the UW-Photo list, where I first learned of
this.

Since when do utter somebodies enter amateur photo contests where the
terms clearly state that the sponsor gets unlimited rights to the
photos?  The only photogs that would "fall" for NAUI's devious
masterplan would be amateur hacks who would be thrilled if their shots
made the cover of NAUI's latest marketing publications.

I'm thrilled when my photos make it* to Wikipedia AND I PUT THEM
THERE !!1!

Hack


*(along with completely giving up all copyrights )

[-hh]

Post by Greg Mossman

Post by -hh

Post by Alan Browne
Do you realize what a virtual mountain you're making out of a molehill?

Perhaps you should realize that you're an utter nobody in comparison
to who participates on the UW-Photo list, where I first learned of
this.

Since when do utter somebodies enter amateur photo contests where the
terms clearly state that the sponsor gets unlimited rights to the
photos?

They don't, but these contests are in effect, hurting their
livelihood.

Post by Greg Mossman
The only photogs that would "fall" for NAUI's devious
masterplan would be amateur hacks who would be thrilled if their
shots made the cover of NAUI's latest marketing publications.

Which is why this Heads-up was posted to a scuba REC* group.


-hh

[sweir]

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman

Post by -hh

Post by Alan Browne
Do you realize what a virtual mountain you're making out of a molehill?

Perhaps you should realize that you're an utter nobody in comparison
to who participates on the UW-Photo list, where I first learned of
this.

Since when do utter somebodies enter amateur photo contests where the
terms clearly state that the sponsor gets unlimited rights to the
photos?

They don't, but these contests are in effect, hurting their
livelihood.

Post by Greg Mossman
The only photogs that would "fall" for NAUI's devious
masterplan would be amateur hacks who would be thrilled if their
shots  made the cover of NAUI's latest marketing publications.

Which is why this Heads-up was posted to a scuba REC* group.
-hh

Just returned from a media trip to Akumal. Nice to meet up with
writers/photographers from other publications and talk about issues
like this. My photographer Jim Kozmik was lamenting how with the
advent of digital and inexpensive underwater housing the bottom has
fallen out of the market u/w images. The value that magazines,
newspapers and websites place upon underwater images is extremely
low. Just look at Flickr to see how many people are willing to give
away their work.

Very very very few underwater photographers every actually sell
images (and let's not talk about cheques clearing the bank) -- the
ratio between fees generated and the cost of equipment is crazily
skewed towards the cost of the equipment. Same holds true for u/w
video. IMHO - I believe that NAUI simply grabbed the rules used by
most other photo contests in the world and dropped them into their
programme, rather than NAUI having a nefarious plan to "steal"
photographs. I think of NAUI as Apple and PADI as PC.

[Alan Browne]

Post by sweir
fallen out of the market u/w images. The value that magazines,
newspapers and websites place upon underwater images is extremely
low. Just look at Flickr to see how many people are willing to give
away their work.

This is hardly unique to the underwater photo industry.

[-hh]

Post by sweir

Post by -hh

Post by Greg Mossman

Post by -hh

Post by Alan Browne
Do you realize what a virtual mountain you're making out of a molehill?

Perhaps you should realize that you're an utter nobody in comparison
to who participates on the UW-Photo list, where I first learned of
this.

Since when do utter somebodies enter amateur photo contests where the
terms clearly state that the sponsor gets unlimited rights to the
photos?

They don't, but these contests are in effect, hurting their
livelihood.

Post by Greg Mossman
The only photogs that would "fall" for NAUI's devious
masterplan would be amateur hacks who would be thrilled if their
shots  made the cover of NAUI's latest marketing publications.

Which is why this Heads-up was posted to a scuba REC* group.
-hh

Just returned from a media trip to Akumal. Nice to meet up with
writers/photographers from other publications and talk about issues
like this.  My photographer Jim Kozmik was lamenting how with the
advent of digital and inexpensive underwater housing the bottom has
fallen out of the market u/w images.  The value that magazines,
newspapers and websites place upon underwater images is extremely
low.  Just look at Flickr to see how many people are willing to give
away their work.

Agreed. There's been quite a decline and depreciation: just look at
the price disparity between Getty and places like Stockphotography.com

Post by sweir
 Very very very few underwater photographers every actually sell
images (and let's not talk about cheques clearing the bank) -- the
ratio between fees generated and the cost of equipment is crazily
skewed towards the cost of the equipment. Same holds true for u/w
video.  IMHO -  I believe that NAUI simply grabbed the rules used by
most other photo contests in the world and dropped them into their
programme, rather than  NAUI having a nefarious plan to "steal"
photographs.  I think of NAUI as Apple and PADI as PC.

Perhaps they did, but it appears that as per activism by members of UW-
Photo, there have been a number of UW-Centric photo contests who have
revised their rules as the result of being contacted. IIRC, the
gentleman who contacted NAUI was actually the former head of one of
the ...California? contests...


-hh

[Alan Browne]

Post by -hh

Post by Alan Browne
Do you realize what a virtual mountain you're making out of a molehill?

Perhaps you should realize that you're an utter nobody in comparison
to who participates on the UW-Photo list, where I first learned of
this.

Of course I'm a nobody there, just as you're a "nobody" in the dozen or
so professional organizations of which I am a member (or associate or
fellow), and which carry a lot more weight than anything to do with
diving/photography.

Post by -hh

Post by Alan Browne
You've been shown that your original premise is wrong, yet you persist
in finding unlikely evil in every corner.

Incorrect. The only part I got wrong was in the interpretation of
the property transfer of the submission.

But you got it so loudly wrong that it was not a minor thing. And there
is no gray in wrong - you were wrong. Period.

Post by -hh

Post by Alan Browne
You can spread the word and try to get as many people as possible to not
participate, and maybe that will cause some reflection at NAUI to
restrict their own use of the photos in their language.

Perhaps you should also read the latest from Bret Gilliam on the
shortcomings of our wonderful dive agencies.

Post by Alan Browne
But frankly, the overall value proposition here (in all ways) does not
amount to a thimble of spit in all the universe's oceans.

Which is about two thimbles more than you. Bye.

Ah the old parting swipe. Wipe away your bitter, angry tears, the fact
is that the NAUI competition is pretty meaningless, photo contributions
to it are tiny fraction of worthwhile photos taken worldwide and their
"commercial" or "art" value is less than $500 (AT BEST).

So a photographer/diver gains a lot more in notoriety from NAUI
publishing his photo and making a few dimes on it than the same
photog/diver would likely make through his own channels unless he is a
noted pro ... who would have nothing to do with the NAUI competition
except out of pity, boredom or an urge to humiliate the rest of you .

[Rob van Leeuwen]

Post by -hh
Guys,
Apologies for the fast & wide blast, but just wanted to let the dive
community know that NAUI is reportedly conducting a so-called "Photo
Contest".
I became aware of this because the terms of this contest are being
discussed on the UW-Photo list - - specifically because its legal
terms are much alligned to be an unethical "Copyright Harvest" than
anything that is in any way fair to the submitter.
If I've read the crux of the discussion properly, submitting an entry
constiutes a **complete** loss of the originator's Copyright.
Similarly, technically speaking, anyone who submits any photo entry to
NAUI on this "Contest" will have to --> delete their own photo from
their own collection <-- because by submitting, they signed over their
complete ownership to NAUI.
Yow.

I agree, it is high time to go above Jed Livingstone's head about
this. Contact NAUI's president, the board, the sponsors of the
contest, etc.
Thanks to Jason and Chris for continuing to fight these sorts of
contests. I don't get it, however. What is it about photography
and our profession that makes every single contest organizer try to
get these kinds of ridiculous terms. If we were songwriters or
other kinds of artists, would there be contests that we'd have to
watch out for also? Why is it that every contest organizer
immediately tries for a rights grab? I can understand that the
concept of copyright may be foreign to most folks, but the concept
of creating art and owning that art can't be that foreign. I
believe that we have ourselves, and the masses of amateurs who
happily "get published" without renumeration, to blame in large
part. Just like all of us are responsible for the Gulf oil spill too.
Norb

Would appreciate it if someone could post a similar "flash" on
Scubaboard too.
According to their website, the current president of NAUI is Jim Bram,
-Hugh

[Ron]

As a professional photographer I never enter any photo contest that
grants rights to use the photo as they wish.

These contests are a way of getting free photos!

Cheers


Ron

[bullshark]

Post by Ron
As a professional photographer I never enter any photo contest that
grants rights to use the photo as they wish.
These contests are a way of getting free photos!
Cheers
Ron

Yes its *true*! Entering contests is a way of winning free prizes!

[RayC]

Post by Ron
As a professional photographer I never enter any photo contest that
grants rights to use the photo as they wish.
These contests are a way of getting free photos!
Cheers
Ron

As a professional photographer, aren't you prohibited from entering
amateur photo contests?