BEWARE - Contest Rules

[photobyfelix]

Hi to all that submit their photos to various contests:

I recently was about to submit an image to a National Geographic traveler Magazine contest (sponsored by Bestbuy) and decided to read the rules before submitting. What I discovered is - just by the act of submitting my image, I was turning over all rights and ownership of that image to the contest owners. The wording of the rule is as follows:

"Entering a photo in this contest constitutes entrants irrevocable assignment, conveyance and transference to sponsor, any and all right, title and interest in the photo, including, without limitations, all copyrights."

Just by entering you are "gifting" your image to the contest owners. I decided not to enter, and also wrote them a letter telling them how disgusted I was to see their rule, and that I would never submit as long as that rule is in affect.

If any of you belong to any type of photo club or association, I suggest you alert your fellow members AND also write to any contests where you see this rule used.

Thanks,

Felix

[Sime™]

Hey Felix... that sounds more dodgy than five day old fish in the sun!... Anything that sees you turning over copyright is super dodgy... unless obviously that's what you're trying to do...!! it's like they're starting their own "stock library" and using a competition to kick start it!!... i'm going to go check it out anyways...

Thanks for the heads up!

Nic? Thoughts on this?

Sime

[Nicole]

That's most definitely some dodgy stuff in those T&C. While many contests essentially ask for an irrevocable license that lets them use your picture however you want (still semi-dodgy in my mind, since it means they can sell it and make money off of it or change it however they want), this is much worse because essentially what they are saying is that you would be infringing *their* copyright if you ever used the picture you submitted.

Just as a side note that's reasonably relevant, pay attention to the difference between giving a contest a license to use your photo and giving them the copyright to it. By giving them a license you can usually still use it (unless they throw in another clause elsewhere that says something different, but this tends to be that you can't say, have it on another site or enter it in another contest... still look at the whole thing). By giving them copyright, the photo is no longer yours and you can't ever use it again without their permission. Very, very bad.

As yet another aside, contests should ask for some sort of license to use your photo, but these licenses usually only ask for a license to display your work, sometimes in other formats then you're submitting it for (e.g. web/print/gallery/etc). If they didn't ask for that license, they could be violating your copyright because they have nothing to say that you otherwise gave them permission For a good example of the sort of clause, just look at Flickr's T&C since you're giving them a license to display your work online (if they didn't have this, they couldn't show your pictures).

[Jamesc359]

Egads! I'd expect to see this sort of thing from some of the more shady photo contests, but not from National Geographic!

[XpLoiT]

that sounds just pathetic! i cant beleive this especially nat. geo. i thought they would be more than happy to play fair. oh well good work on the heads up! hopefully we can continue to post places of reasonable and fair competitions and expose these for what they are worth

[porterd2nz]

National Geographic's usual wording is:

You grant to National Geographic Society and its subsidiaries and licensees ("NGS") the following rights: a royalty-free, worldwide, perpetual license to display, distribute, reproduce and create derivatives of the Photograph, in whole or in part, without further review or participation from you, in any medium now existing or subsequently developed, in editorial, commercial, promotional and trade uses in connection with NGS Products.

This is what I'd expect, a license to do what they have to do to get their job done, while letting me do whatever else I want with the photo.

Are NG actually hosting this contest, or someone else? I just can't see them throwing away that big a chunk of goodwill, and it seems to be a very juvenile mistake for them to make.

PS: On another note, they also have some interesting release forms available for download:

• In the event original works of art owned by third parties appear in the Photograph, you must be prepared to provide an Artist Release signed by the third party copyright holder (Download the Artist Release)
• In the event recognizable people appear in your Photograph, you must be prepared to provide the Personal Release signed by those people, authorizing our publication of the Photograph (Download the Personal Release)
• In the event the Photograph is taken on private property, you must be prepared to provide the Location Release signed by the owners of the property, authorizing our publication of the Photograph (Download the Location Release)

[xxpinballxx]

I went to google and looked for photo contests.....alot I would say the majority of them are saying the same thing.
As much as I can guess is the reasons would include not knowing how or what they will use the winning photos for or where and not wanting to get into any red tape having the rights to it makes it alot easier. As shady as it sounds seems to be the norm....I know from poetry contests they do the same pretty much.
I guess for us photographers we just need to know going into it that the photo will be pretty much gone forever and take another shot at slightly a different angle or seting to make it its own...lol! I don't think I would mind if I took the photo especially for the contest but for someone entering a favorite photo of theirs that fits the contest theme it could be a huge loss.

[Major_Small]

those rules were written up by a company called "ePrize"

here they are:
https://nationalgeographicandbestbuy...cial_Rules.pdf
the cited part is towards the end of section 5.

I don't really think this is anything too crazy. They just want tight control over the images they publish. Think about it. If your image gets multinational attention through their publication, people recognize it as a national geographic photo. Now, if you still own copyright, you can do as you wish. But national geographic will forever be linked with that photo. You could easily imply that national geographic supports whatever cause lends itself to that image.

Also, now if somebody sees that image somewhere they think it shouldn't be (a background in a car ad, for example), national geographic will have a very hard time tracking it down. Is it stolen from them, or did you sell a license to somebody who could have sold the license further down?

I realize this is a little "out there", but you gotta cover your own ass

[Sime™]

Was just reading the t+c's again... are they actually asking for the copyright of the photo to be handed over, or, are they asking for any associated copyright [eg: a sculpture that's in your picture would need a copyright release] documentation... maybe?.. still... sounds dodgy to moi...

[xxpinballxx]

Originally Posted by Sime™

Was just reading the t+c's again... are they actually asking for the copyright of the photo to be handed over, or, are they asking for any associated copyright [eg: a sculpture that's in your picture would need a copyright release] documentation... maybe?.. still... sounds dodgy to moi...

seems its just any licenses needed for subjects in the shot. Also it seems its saying you have no right to photo after submitting it. They have full reign and can even edit photo before it becomes submitted and can be used in any way they wish for as long as they wish to promote anything they wish without any consent or acknowledgment or compensation. I still don't think its all that uncommon. Just a way to protect themselves.