RE: [Leica] Re: Korda sues

[Austin Franklin <austin@darkroom.com>]

> The ad agency is making money from use of the photograph. The
> advertiser is making money from use of the photograph. And, unless he
> has waived his rights in writing, the photographer should expect to
> share in the money being made from use of his photograph. And I am
> continually amazed at the number of advertisers and ad agencies which
> fail to grasp this.

Gee, you ARE looking for trouble ;-)

Well, I completely disagree with this 'entitlement'.  I fail to understand 
why anyone could believe that when they are paid to DO a job in the first 
place, they are somehow entitled to be given MORE money down the road for 
that job they were already paid in full for.  Are you going to give BACK 
money if the ad campaign is a flop?  NO?  They why should you be given MORE 
money if it's a success.

No other industry does business this (in my opinion "absurd") way.  Imagine 
if EVERY person who had a design element towards your computer (all those 
programmers), your car (all the design engineers and assemblers..) etc etc 
'shared in the money being made from their work' aside from GETTING PAID IN 
FULL FOR THE JOB IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Gee, we have to charge $1,842 for the toaster, well, because, we have to 
pay royalties to each of the guys, for their 'creative efforts' used in the 
design.  Who's to say where 'creative effort' stops, they guy assembling 
your car, well, he believes he is 'creative' in how he does his 'art'...and 
who are you to say he isn't?

I'm for everyone making money, don't get me wrong...but the point is, the 
photographer is paid for all their time and expenses anyway, so why should 
they get any more money than that?  No one else does in any other 
profession.

Now, if the photographer did the work for reduced rate, or on his/her own, 
then it's a different story.  But being paid for a job, the person paying 
you for the job, I believe, owns the work they paid you to do.

I know others here strongly disagree with me here.  This is all I'll say on 
this issue, in this thread anyway ;-)