I tend to purchase coins that have good images or a TrueView and am willing to pay more if they have one. In fact, I often evaluate similar coins from different sources and often purchase a coin that has a nice image and pass over those that don’t. I’ve asked permission to use the images before, many say sure and some say ok if you give them credit, I’ve never had them say no you can’t use it. But when they say I can use it if I give them credit, I usually do so the first few times I use it, but then I forget and/or use the images in a collage or virtual album where there are lots of coins with images from different sources and it doesn’t make sense to keep saying which coin images came from which source. I don’t think I ever used someone else’s images in order to sell a coin though. I can take my own photos, I’m just too lazy to take them if I already have a usable image.
@DeplorableDan said:
So where do we draw the line then? I had assumed that most dealers who sell a coin with nice pictures don’t mind when the purchaser of said coin uses said pictures. Is it ok to use the photos to show off on social media and other forums, but not ok to use to advertise a sale?
After all, the dealer makes a profit which is justified by their time and expertise, and isn’t the photo of the coin included in the “time and expertise” package? I’m not that good of a photographer, but if I was I don’t think I’d take issue with a client using photos of a coin that they purchased where I’ve already made my money. Just like the client who purchased the coin likely takes no issue with the dealer using that photo for marketing and advertising purposes in the future.
In this specific instance, I would expect a professional auction house to take their own photos rather than using a clients, and I can certainly understand the OP frustration here. However, I can’t say my opinion would be the same for Joe the collector who uses Doug Winter’s photo to sell his double eagle on the BST.
I draw the line at this: my photos, you need my permission to use them in any capacity.
You can’t post them, share them, do anything with them unless I’ve allowed you to. In fact, all of my images have an embedded copyright that states as such.
But are you speaking from the perspective of being a photographer in the capacity of your current business model, or a coin dealer? As I understand it, a client pays you to take images of their coins, to do with them as they wish presumably, right? If the client pays you to take the photos of their coin, are the images only yours, are they the clients, or both? Does the exchange of money in return for the images not qualify as “permission”?
Alternatively, how would you approach that if you were a dealer? Say for example you’re selling a coin with your exceptional photos. Would you tell the collector that they can pay an additional $5 or $10 to be able to use the images, or would you just have the “Flyingal photo package” padded into the profit margin on the coin?
If a client pays for my photos, they buy the rights to post them as they please. For example, when I took images of your coins, your are free to post those anywhere so long as they remain in the form I sent them to you.
This would not extend to anyone if I used my photos to sell a coin, even to the buyer. They bought the coin, not the rights to the images. If they want the images, they’re free to request the right to buy them (or I’ll often tell the buyer they’re free to use the images if they simply ask if they can). Essentially, the photo rights are completely separate of any sale of the coin.
I think people would be surprised how receptive photographers are to sharing their work with others so they can post, so long as they ASK. It rubs us the wrong way when our work is simply posted without our permission or knowing.
Fair use is the exception to this, when a photograph is properly cited, and the use is educational in nature, without any monetary gain to the user. I know this because it’s how images in published articles are used via fair use. Otherwise, the copyright applies.
@DeplorableDan said:
So where do we draw the line then? I had assumed that most dealers who sell a coin with nice pictures don’t mind when the purchaser of said coin uses said pictures. Is it ok to use the photos to show off on social media and other forums, but not ok to use to advertise a sale?
After all, the dealer makes a profit which is justified by their time and expertise, and isn’t the photo of the coin included in the “time and expertise” package? I’m not that good of a photographer, but if I was I don’t think I’d take issue with a client using photos of a coin that they purchased where I’ve already made my money. Just like the client who purchased the coin likely takes no issue with the dealer using that photo for marketing and advertising purposes in the future.
In this specific instance, I would expect a professional auction house to take their own photos rather than using a clients, and I can certainly understand the OP frustration here. However, I can’t say my opinion would be the same for Joe the collector who uses Doug Winter’s photo to sell his double eagle on the BST.
I draw the line at this: my photos, you need my permission to use them in any capacity.
You can’t post them, share them, do anything with them unless I’ve allowed you to. In fact, all of my images have an embedded copyright that states as such.
But are you speaking from the perspective of being a photographer in the capacity of your current business model, or a coin dealer? As I understand it, a client pays you to take images of their coins, to do with them as they wish presumably, right? If the client pays you to take the photos of their coin, are the images only yours, are they the clients, or both? Does the exchange of money in return for the images not qualify as “permission”?
Alternatively, how would you approach that if you were a dealer? Say for example you’re selling a coin with your exceptional photos. Would you tell the collector that they can pay an additional $5 or $10 to be able to use the images, or would you just have the “Flyingal photo package” padded into the profit margin on the coin?
If a client pays for my photos, they buy the rights to post them as they please. For example, when I took images of your coins, your are free to post those anywhere so long as they remain in the form I sent them to you.
This would not extend to anyone if I used my photos to sell a coin, even to the buyer. They bought the coin, not the rights to the images. If they want the images, they’re free to request the right to buy them (or I’ll often tell the buyer they’re free to use the images if they simply ask if they can). Essentially, the photo rights are completely separate of any sale of the coin.
I think people would be surprised how receptive photographers are to sharing their work with others so they can post, so long as they ASK. It rubs us the wrong way when our work is simply posted without our permission or knowing.
Fair use is the exception to this, when a photograph is properly cited, and the use is educational in nature, without any monetary gain to the user. I know this because it’s how images in published articles are used via fair use. Otherwise, the copyright applies.
Thank you for taking the time to clarify. I think that if I were in your position, or the position of a prominent dealer with good photos, I would brand them in a way that doesn’t impact viewing. That way, id be getting free advertising every time they were used.
Agree that if a client simply asks to use the photos, I would oblige and be appreciative that they asked first.
. I think that if I were in your position, or the position of a prominent dealer with good photos, I would brand them in a way that doesn’t impact viewing. That way, id be getting free advertising every time they were used.
Well that is a freaking good idea, hmmm.
821 slabs x 4 photos each = 3284 updates to photos then reload to 3 platforms ....
There are some facts that need to be added to offer an opinion...
Were your images of the coins available to the dealers-buyers prior to purchase? How did the dealers-buyers obtain the images?
Did any of the dealers-buyers request images from you directly and did you provide those images upon request without limitations? Did the images play any role in the sale of the coins?
Were there any representations made as to grade/authenticity/rarity whereby the images represent those representations?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
@DeplorableDan said:
So where do we draw the line then? I had assumed that most dealers who sell a coin with nice pictures don’t mind when the purchaser of said coin uses said pictures. Is it ok to use the photos to show off on social media and other forums, but not ok to use to advertise a sale?
After all, the dealer makes a profit which is justified by their time and expertise, and isn’t the photo of the coin included in the “time and expertise” package? I’m not that good of a photographer, but if I was I don’t think I’d take issue with a client using photos of a coin that they purchased where I’ve already made my money. Just like the client who purchased the coin likely takes no issue with the dealer using that photo for marketing and advertising purposes in the future.
In this specific instance, I would expect a professional auction house to take their own photos rather than using a clients, and I can certainly understand the OP frustration here. However, I can’t say my opinion would be the same for Joe the collector who uses Doug Winter’s photo to sell his double eagle on the BST.
I draw the line at this: my photos, you need my permission to use them in any capacity.
You can’t post them, share them, do anything with them unless I’ve allowed you to. In fact, all of my images have an embedded copyright that states as such.
But are you speaking from the perspective of being a photographer in the capacity of your current business model, or a coin dealer? As I understand it, a client pays you to take images of their coins, to do with them as they wish presumably, right? If the client pays you to take the photos of their coin, are the images only yours, are they the clients, or both? Does the exchange of money in return for the images not qualify as “permission”?
Alternatively, how would you approach that if you were a dealer? Say for example you’re selling a coin with your exceptional photos. Would you tell the collector that they can pay an additional $5 or $10 to be able to use the images, or would you just have the “Flyingal photo package” padded into the profit margin on the coin?
If a client pays for my photos, they buy the rights to post them as they please. For example, when I took images of your coins, your are free to post those anywhere so long as they remain in the form I sent them to you.
This would not extend to anyone if I used my photos to sell a coin, even to the buyer. They bought the coin, not the rights to the images. If they want the images, they’re free to request the right to buy them (or I’ll often tell the buyer they’re free to use the images if they simply ask if they can). Essentially, the photo rights are completely separate of any sale of the coin.
I think people would be surprised how receptive photographers are to sharing their work with others so they can post, so long as they ASK. It rubs us the wrong way when our work is simply posted without our permission or knowing.
Fair use is the exception to this, when a photograph is properly cited, and the use is educational in nature, without any monetary gain to the user. I know this because it’s how images in published articles are used via fair use. Otherwise, the copyright applies.
Thank you for taking the time to clarify. I think that if I were in your position, or the position of a prominent dealer with good photos, I would brand them in a way that doesn’t impact viewing. That way, id be getting free advertising every time they were used.
Agree that if a client simply asks to use the photos, I would oblige and be appreciative that they asked first.
As Chris says, that's a lot of work. I also hate the look. For me, it's better for people just to follow the copyright as they're legally obligated to do.
I only raised it to point out that it is not always "illegal" to use copyrighted photos. [For example, daily on this forum.]
The vast majority of photos posted here are covered by fair use doctrine. Maybe not as much on the BST though, I don't know.
What do you think our hosts would say if you posted a coin for sale on the BST, with photos that were obviously taken from the auction where you just purchased the coin? Commercial use, not fair use. Copyright infringement unless you have written authorization.
I'm not arguing the commercial point at all. However, there are ways your photos can enter public domain.
The OP's first post references a business using his photos, without permission, for obvious commercial purposes. On this, I think the law is perfectly clear, and it has nothing to do with who owns the subject material.
@BryceM said:
The OP's first post references a business using his photos, without permission, for obvious commercial purposes. On this, I think the law is perfectly clear, and it has nothing to do with who owns the subject material.
100%
This isn't a collector that saved the photos of coins they bought. Nothing to see there.
Without permission/license the seller is open to legal action. If the said photos are also registered I think the slam dunk starts at $150,000 per incident. (don't steal)
The OP was never approached or gave permission/license to use their images. While many people don't care if others use their images to promote the sale of said coins with no compensation for facilitating profits for other sellers, some people do care.
The response from the seller to the OP would bother me. It appears to be a straight out admission of theft by claiming the said photos are the sellers. Taking credit for them make the seller look like a blatant thief. No one I would ever purchase from.
If a coin or other object changes hands with the intent to resell, it is the responsibility of the new owner to obtain images of their own, whether that is by taking their own images or contracting a photographer. It is never okay to use someone else's work without obtaining permission or providing payment or at least some form of credit.
@Floridafacelifter said:
I don’t think anyone recognizes you from a coin photo and then forms an opinion of you based on another dealer’s pricing of that coin- that seems like a real stretch and “seven degrees of Kevin Bacon” type stuff.
All alternate scenario- two individuals on MyCollect use images of my coins as their avatars AND use photos of my coins in their ads advertising their coin businesses, even though neither of them have ever owned the coins themselves. Is this wrong or unethical?
My mother saw the picnic table she liked in an ad, from a major dept. store.
When she traveled to its source supporting the ad's photo of her choice set, the salesperson said that the table was never in their inventory. She huffed and she puffed and was given her choice of any style or price of another set for the sale price
she saw in the ad. (1973 ?)
A disclaimer is so easy.
@BryceM said:
The OP's first post references a business using his photos, without permission, for obvious commercial purposes. On this, I think the law is perfectly clear, and it has nothing to do with who owns the subject material.
Comments
I tend to purchase coins that have good images or a TrueView and am willing to pay more if they have one. In fact, I often evaluate similar coins from different sources and often purchase a coin that has a nice image and pass over those that don’t. I’ve asked permission to use the images before, many say sure and some say ok if you give them credit, I’ve never had them say no you can’t use it. But when they say I can use it if I give them credit, I usually do so the first few times I use it, but then I forget and/or use the images in a collage or virtual album where there are lots of coins with images from different sources and it doesn’t make sense to keep saying which coin images came from which source. I don’t think I ever used someone else’s images in order to sell a coin though. I can take my own photos, I’m just too lazy to take them if I already have a usable image.
Mr_Spud
I only use my images. Problem solved.
My current registry sets:
20th Century Type Set
Virtual DANSCO 7070
Slabbed IHC set - Missing the Anacs Slabbed coins
If a client pays for my photos, they buy the rights to post them as they please. For example, when I took images of your coins, your are free to post those anywhere so long as they remain in the form I sent them to you.
This would not extend to anyone if I used my photos to sell a coin, even to the buyer. They bought the coin, not the rights to the images. If they want the images, they’re free to request the right to buy them (or I’ll often tell the buyer they’re free to use the images if they simply ask if they can). Essentially, the photo rights are completely separate of any sale of the coin.
I think people would be surprised how receptive photographers are to sharing their work with others so they can post, so long as they ASK. It rubs us the wrong way when our work is simply posted without our permission or knowing.
Fair use is the exception to this, when a photograph is properly cited, and the use is educational in nature, without any monetary gain to the user. I know this because it’s how images in published articles are used via fair use. Otherwise, the copyright applies.
Coin Photographer.
Thank you for taking the time to clarify. I think that if I were in your position, or the position of a prominent dealer with good photos, I would brand them in a way that doesn’t impact viewing. That way, id be getting free advertising every time they were used.
Agree that if a client simply asks to use the photos, I would oblige and be appreciative that they asked first.
Type Collector of U.S. Pre-33 Gold https://instagram.com/deplorable_dan Successful transactions with- @drfish, @Cladiator, @johnny010, @Pedzola, @PerryHall, @2windy2fish, @Ike1964, @JohnThePainter, @rpmsrpms, @REALGATOR
Well that is a freaking good idea, hmmm.
821 slabs x 4 photos each = 3284 updates to photos then reload to 3 platforms ....
That would be a freaking lot of work
There are some facts that need to be added to offer an opinion...
Were your images of the coins available to the dealers-buyers prior to purchase? How did the dealers-buyers obtain the images?
Did any of the dealers-buyers request images from you directly and did you provide those images upon request without limitations? Did the images play any role in the sale of the coins?
Were there any representations made as to grade/authenticity/rarity whereby the images represent those representations?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
As Chris says, that's a lot of work. I also hate the look. For me, it's better for people just to follow the copyright as they're legally obligated to do.
Coin Photographer.
I'm not arguing the commercial point at all. However, there are ways your photos can enter public domain.
The OP's first post references a business using his photos, without permission, for obvious commercial purposes. On this, I think the law is perfectly clear, and it has nothing to do with who owns the subject material.
100%
This isn't a collector that saved the photos of coins they bought. Nothing to see there.
Without permission/license the seller is open to legal action. If the said photos are also registered I think the slam dunk starts at $150,000 per incident. (don't steal)
The OP was never approached or gave permission/license to use their images. While many people don't care if others use their images to promote the sale of said coins with no compensation for facilitating profits for other sellers, some people do care.
The response from the seller to the OP would bother me. It appears to be a straight out admission of theft by claiming the said photos are the sellers. Taking credit for them make the seller look like a blatant thief. No one I would ever purchase from.
If a coin or other object changes hands with the intent to resell, it is the responsibility of the new owner to obtain images of their own, whether that is by taking their own images or contracting a photographer. It is never okay to use someone else's work without obtaining permission or providing payment or at least some form of credit.
Custom album maker and numismatic photographer, see my portfolio here: (http://www.donahuenumismatics.com/).
So the basic rule is.
If you didn’t take the photo don’t use it without the photographer’s permission
When you buy a coin you don’t own the photos the previous owner took.
Sadly most people don’t care and will use photos that aren’t theirs without permission.
My current registry sets:
20th Century Type Set
Virtual DANSCO 7070
Slabbed IHC set - Missing the Anacs Slabbed coins
I could care less what they do with it. Why all the fuss….
Furthermore the photos are property of the new owner. I would tell them enjoy your coin / photos
A dealer I know - Jimmy there are certain auc houses, sellers he buys from bc he can copy their photos and use them in his listing.
My mother saw the picnic table she liked in an ad, from a major dept. store.
When she traveled to its source supporting the ad's photo of her choice set, the salesperson said that the table was never in their inventory. She huffed and she puffed and was given her choice of any style or price of another set for the sale price
she saw in the ad. (1973 ?)
A disclaimer is so easy.
It's less clear if it is on ebay
No, but, I realy don't care if they do.
I wouldn't care.