ZachIsHere

Pitch Uses Local Photographer’s Work Without Permission

// July 5th, 2008 // Photo News, Thoughts

Update: I guess I was not clear enough in my original article that it isn’t my photo that the Pitch used in their article rather that of the user I am quoting from the Flickr discussion group source provided below. Sorry if my post was confusing. -Z

(Via Flickr’s Kansas City Group)

I picked up a copy of this week’s Pitch yesterday at lunch. (It has the Sonic Drive-In guys on the cover.) Late in the afternoon I was flipping through it waiting for the day to be over. I turned to David Martin’s column on page 10 and saw a photo of mine from flickr. It’s certainly not any great photo, but I was shocked to see it in print.

This is the only site I’ve posted this photo on, and I have my photos marked ‘All Rights Reserved.’ I know there is always some risk of your photos being snagged once they are online, but I thought the Pitch would at least ask before publication. The photo is attached to the online story as well (here), also without citation.

So this afternoon I called the editor, C.J. Janovy. She was in a meeting and I left a voicemail. To her credit, she called me back within 15 minutes. I explained my concern regarding the publication of my photo and C.J. agreed. She was actually glad I called because according to her, when they chose the photo nobody could remember where it came from. She thinks it might’ve appeared on a Pitch blog originally, but she’s not sure. C.J. told me they sometimes use photos from flickr, but protocol is to notify the photographer first.

Despite my inclination to barter for concert tickets or a meal with Charles Ferruzza, I told C.J. I’d be fine with a correction run in next week’s Pitch. I just thought this was interesting as I was somewhat amused to see one of my crappier photos used, but somewhat peeved I wasn’t asked. Perhaps some of you in the KC group will see your photos in the Pitch in future issues…hopefully with your permission beforehand!

Oh, just for the record, here’s the photo for what it’s worth:

After reading this I got a bit worked up and my fingers went to town on a post that included a little more saber rattling about the rights of photographers but some time passed and I find myself editing that first draft to a more understanding version. Call it the calmer and gentler Zach. It must have been the beautiful 4th of July weather we enjoyed that softened me. I thought about how I generally enjoy the Pitch and imagined myself trying to keep up with what I am sure is a hectic deadline schedule.

Trying to give the benefit of the doubt here.

Photography is an easy avenue to cut corners in when it comes to print publications. Got a story that needs some a little visual love? Hop on to Flickr and you are a few clicks away from getting a quality photo that is a good match for literally any story.

Publications need to respect the rights of creatives and content producers from all mediums. Maybe this just fell through the cracks. Maybe they were trying to save some money and didn’t think they would get caught. There could be a lot of reasons for this oversight.

In any case there are a lot of great photos out there with creative commons usage rights that allow for publication, or photographers that are very reasonable when asked for permission and\or compensation to use their work.

If all fails and that perfect photo can’t be found?

Hire me.

My contact information is in the upper right hand corner. Not many people have a better beat on KC’s happenings through the shutter.

Related Links:
‘10 Photos of Kansas City you have not seen that belong on your wall’

‘GenKC Event at City Market’

‘KC Zombie Walk 2008′