Taylor Swift has been getting a good deal of attention in the last few weeks. First calling apple out on an unfair usage of her music, and now people are claiming that she has done the same to photographers in the past.
Though it is similar, this is totally a different situation.
Taylor Swift has not called these photographers to come to the concert. The photographers are asking permission to go to the concert to shoot photos. She’s saying they can, but these are the conditions. Its her concert, why can’t she set the conditions?
Apple wants to use her work, and not pay her for it. This photographer wants to use her face, and now have her put any conditions on what he does with it.
It seems to me that he is much closer to Apple in this than she is. They both want to use her product without any restrictions from her. – FredDerfman
Still this is an interesting read into usage rights!
Taylor Swift has been accused making photographers hand over their lucrative rights to her.
A photographer has penned an open letter to Taylor Swift accusing her of taking lucrative rights to images – just hours after she criticised Apple for not paying artists fairly.
Jason Sheldon, a freelance photographer based in Birmingham, West Midlands, claims that copyright of all pictures taken of the pop star during concerts are passed to her agency after their first use.
This means that following the initial publication of photographs, for which a freelancer usually accepts a one-off fee, he cannot further exploit his work.
The 25-year-old’s agency, Firefly Entertainment Inc (FEI), then has the right to use the material for promotional purposes with the publisher’s permission.
It comes after the Shake It Off singer wrote her own open letter to Apple giving her reasons for refusing to allow her album 1989 to be included in their new music streaming service.
She was successful in convincing the company to pay writers, producers and artists royalties during a three month free trial for those who sign up for Apple Music today.
But in the hours after she published the letter on her website, Mr Sheldon took to his own blog where he accuses her of double standards and asks how she is ‘any different to Apple?’
He also posted a copy of the contract that he was asked to sign before he photographed her in 2011 during her concert at LG Arena, Birmingham, on his Junction 10 Photography website.
Mr Sheldon claims that the contract allows her agency ‘free and unlimited use’ of his work ‘worldwide, in perpetuity’, although her team say he has misrepresented this clause.
He states: ‘Now… forgive me if I’m wrong, but if you take points 2 and 3 in that contract (which is provided to photographers who need to agree to those terms before they are allowed to do their job in photographing you for editorial outlets), it appears to be a complete rights grab, and demands that you are granted free and unlimited use of our work, worldwide, in perpetuity.
‘You say in your letter to Apple that ‘Three months is a long time to go unpaid.’ But you seem happy to restrict us to being paid once, and never being able to earn from our work ever again, while granting you the rights to exploit our work for your benefit for all eternity.
‘How are you any different to Apple? If you don’t like being exploited, that’s great… make a huge statement about it, and you’ll have my support.
‘But how about making sure you’re not guilty of the very same tactic before you have a pop at someone else?
Jason Sheldon wrote an open letter to the singer where he posted a copy of the contract (above) he was asked to sign in 2011 before he photographed her at the LG Arena in Birmingham
‘Photographers need to earn a living as well. Like Apple, you can afford to pay for photographs so please stop forcing us to hand them over to you while you prevent us from publishing them more than once, ever.’
He suggests that photographers are too scared to speak out about these contracts in case they are ‘blacklisted’ by management and PR companies.
He adds: ‘There are hundreds of professional concert photographers who don’t enjoy that security.. they don’t have the voice you do, and they don’t have the public favour that you have when it comes to demanding fair rights for their work, and they have a much higher risk of being prevented from working in future, not just at your shows, but any show which is connected by the same promoter, venue, PR, or management company.’
Mr Sheldon is now urging Taylor Swift to change her policy for photographs, in a similar response that Apple had to her letter by now agreeing to pay artists.
He added: ‘With all due respect to you too Taylor, you can do the right thing and change your photo policy.
The open letter penned by Jason Sheldon on his blog accuses Taylor Swift of double standards and asks how she is ‘any different to Apple?’
‘Photographers don’t ask for your music for free. Please don’t ask us to provide you with your marketing material for free. Time to stop being ‘Mean’.’
Mr Sheldon later updated his blog post to make it clear that the contract is not for those being hired or paid by Taylor Swift but for self-employed photographers.
He added that he is asked to photograph concerts by publications and only receives payment if the photos are used and not for turning up to a show and shooting it.
‘If the newspaper has a bigger story to run and doesn’t have enough room to use my photo, I don’t get paid,’ he said.
‘When I’m not allowed to do anything else with the photos, that means I’ve incurred expenses to work, which I can’t recover.
‘Therefore, preventing me from licensing my photos to more than one publication, or even (as later versions of this contract stipulate) preventing me from using the images for my own self promotion in a portfolio etc while they can use them without licensing the usage is highly unfair and unjustified.’
He also claims that the payment by newspapers is barely enough to cover his expenses, which is why many photographers rely on future sales to other publications.
A UK spokesperson for Taylor Swift said: ‘The standard photography agreement has been misrepresented in that it clearly states that any photographer shooting The 1989 World Tour has the opportunity for further use of said photographs with management’s approval.
‘Another distinct misrepresentation is the claim that the copyright of the photographs will be with anyone other than the photographer – this agreement does not transfer copyright away from the photographer. Every artist has the right to and should protect the use of their name and likeness.’ Via dailymail.co.uk
