I just came across this article about the band Coldplay. Just who do they think they are? Apparently, if you manage to get a photography pass to one of their gigs, they will expect you to sign over all the copyright for any and all the pics that you take, to them.
Here is a quote from the website that brought this to my attention :
In case you hadn't noticed, most rock photographers aren't exactly rich. The fees they get for attending and photographing gigs are mostly risible. The only reason it's worthwhile is because they can resell the images later as stock photos.
In this case, Coldplay wants that revenue for itself. It wants to profit from the skill and talent of the photographers. Just how rich do these guys need to be?
This is part of a larger trend, one that involves no small amount of hypocrisy. One the one hand, photographers' clients are reducing fees, using amateurs (so-called citizen journalists, micro-stock etc). There's a strong implication that the skills and artistic talent of photographers isn't worth much - certainly not as much as it used to be.
I wonder what the band's reaction to the pro photogs was in the early days, when they wanted and needed all the publicity they could get?
Check it out here: Webviant.com
Off Target: Doctor Who Discovers... Brexit
1 week ago