Last week I photographed most of the Epicenter 2012 show. You can see the photos HERE.
I did not shoot the headlining act, The Stone Temple Pilots, because they expected me to sign a rights grabbing photo release.
The release which was sent out before the show reads as follows:
STONE TEMPLE PILOTS
Photo Release
AS CONSIDERATION for permitting the undersigned Photographer to use photographs of Stone Temple Pilots (“Artist”) to be taken by Photographer at _______________on _______, (the “Photographs”), solely as part of an article featuring Artist appearing in the ______________ issue of _____________ (the “Publication”), for distribution solely in _________________________, Photographer agrees as follows:
All Photographs to be used in the Publication are subject to the prior approval of Artist. Except for the limited right to use approved Photographs in the issue of the Publication set forth above, Photographer shall not authorize or permit any use of any Photographs in any manner or media without the prior written consent of Artist. In no event may Artist’s name or likeness be used in connection with any advertising or promotion of the Publication.
Photographer warrants and represents that Artist owns all right, title and interest in and to the Photographs including, without limitation, all copyrights, renewals and extensions thereof. Photographer hereby grants to Artist the irrevocable right in perpetuity to use the Photographs in any and all manner and media, now or hereinafter known, without payment or other compensation to Photographer. Photographer agrees to promptly provide Artist, at no charge, with duplicate negatives, transparencies and/or digital files of the Photographs as requested by Artist.
Photographer acknowledges that Artist makes no representation, warranty, or agreement with respect to the Photographs and Photographer shall obtain (or cause the Publication to obtain) all necessary third-party consents, waivers and approvals relating to the Publication’s use of the Photographs.
Photographer agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Artist and Artist’s management, agents, representatives, licensees, successors and assigns (the “Indemnified Parties”) from and against any claims, losses, damages and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) incurred by any of the Indemnified Parties arising from or relating to any use of the Photographs or any breach by Photographer of this Agreement.
Dated: ______________________ _______________________________
Photographer
Printed Name:____________________
Address: _____________________
_____________________
I refused to sign this and so I did not shoot the band.
But other photographers did sign this. Some even signed it, then lied and said that the band had made an exception in their case.
Lets look at what is wrong with this release. The first paragraph is pretty standard. It just states what show and who the photographer is working for. The second paragraph is a little restrictive but not all that unusual. It basically restricts what the images can be used for.
Then we get to the third paragraph.
Here it is again..
Photographer warrants and represents that Artist owns all right, title and interest in and to the Photographs including, without limitation, all copyrights, renewals and extensions thereof. Photographer hereby grants to Artist the irrevocable right in perpetuity to use the Photographs in any and all manner and media, now or hereinafter known, without payment or other compensation to Photographer. Photographer agrees to promptly provide Artist, at no charge, with duplicate negatives, transparencies and/or digital files of the Photographs as requested by Artist.
This paragraph states that you, the photographer, will handover the rights to your images to the band and for that you will not be paid in any way, shape or form. It allows the band to do what ever they want with the images and again you get no compensation at all. This is crazy. And if you were one of the photographers who signed this release, you are an idiot. Not only did you agree to give away your work for free, your signing this document is training the band that this type of release is fine and that it doesn’t need to change.
For the photographers who refused to sign this release. Thank you. If no-one signs it, it will change. But as long as there are photographers out there who will happily hand over their work for free nothing is going to change. So I ask all the concert photographers out there.
Please stop signing these rights grabbing releases.
I can’t understand how anyone can go along with this! It’s like the band would give up all their rights to their own music when you’ve listened to any of their songs. I doubt that many bands would sign such an agreement, right?
Idiots abound.
I am sure that those that signed the contract are amateus that only wanted: 1) free entrance, at least for a few songs, or 2) looking to add to their portfolio, just for show off, with no intention of ever making money with the photos.
Either way, they are spoiling the business. You have no idea how difficult it is to make your living as a pro event photographer when you have all this trolls with cheap Targer hardware requesting photo-pass access as well.
The problem with your point number 2 is that by signing this release photographers aren’t even allowed to use the images in their own portfolio! As soon as that shutter button is clicked, the photo belongs exclusively to the band. Photographers can’t post a single image anywhere but in their article; so they can’t brag over facebook, twitter, instagram, tumblr, flickr, etc.
I’ve actually found that several people who sign these releases don’t use their photos as their main source of income. They usually have a day job or something that helps them pay the bills. They also use the excuse that “psh, they’ll never enforce this release” or “they’ll never ask me for my stuff.” That’s how most of the photographers in Detroit are.
Personally I’ve only signed one rights grab and that was for Coachella; I was approved for credentials before being notified that such a release existed. :-\
Anyway my whole point is that I agree; these releases are TERRIBLE!! But when we stop signing they’ll stop being made!
I knew someone who signed the rights grabbing Guns N Roses release. When I asked why she did it, she said “it’s Guns N Roses!” When I pointed out she couldn’t even use the photos in her portfolio or post them anyplace, she glossed over that fact, just to be in the pit for GNR.
I was happy to walk out of the venue with you. We also posted about it on our site.
http://socalmusictoday.com/?p=5688
We received a call after the fact re: Scars on Broadway and told we were supposed to sign a similar release for them, or to remove the photos . So they were omited from our coverage as well
I shot the Aftershock Festival here in Sacramento (basically very similar lineup to Epicenter) on Sept 23rd. I’d seen the STP tour release at least a month ahead of time thanks to Music Photographers on FB, and decided that if they presented me with that release, I wouldn’t sign it.
Day of the show, no bands required releases up until it was time to load into the pit for STP. Security/tour managers told us that if we didn’t sign the release, we couldn’t shoot. However, the release was only taken care of before the day of the show. They didn’t have releases there for us to sign it. So out of probably a max of 15 photogs there that day, MAYBE 4 had previously signed it and shot it. The rest of us just stood outside of the pit and watched their set (that started 30 minutes late).
Other interesting note about the STP set… They were not allowing other band members from the tour to be on stage off to the side, like normally allowed. NO ONE was allowed side stage. Talk about super controlling.
I left maybe halfway through the set. I was done.
reibann