hi everybody, I've been lurking on this thread and watching this whole thing develop. I thought I might add my 2ยข...
Is US$3k unreasonable for this photo? We on this list don't know. I'm not in the field, but my wife is a commercial illustrator and I assume the markets work similarly. The price for usage is based on many factors that we don't have the specifics for. Mr. Bui isn't selling the photo, he's selling usage rights. Generally prices are negotiated around size of reproduction, exclusivity, distribution (how many eyeballs will see it), how many times it can be used, it what regions it can be used, etc, etc. We don't have any of these specifics so it's very hard to make a judgment on whether or not the price is reasonable. IMHO if what Mr. Bui is selling is the right to use this photo 1 time non-exclusively on this printed banner at the conference then 3k seems high to me. But, as he said, it's been used so he is now in the more powerful negotiating position. Having said that it would probably be best for everyone to resolve it using a mediator that knows the market and have both parties agree to abide by whatever price this mediator comes up with. Good luck to everyone involved :) On 6/30/07, Lan Bui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Robert, I'm sorry about the miscommunication on negotiation. > > I only come to you now because you offered yourself, I never thought > you were one to make executive decisions at PodTech (correct me if I'm > wrong). I know John is someone that can make executive decisions. > > I know how hard it must be for him to deal with his mother death. It > is a horrible time for me to be asking anything of him. > > I keep posting to the group in reply to posts, but I want to talk to > John when he is ready; or talk to someone else that can make decisions > for PodTech. > > -Lan > www.LanBui.com > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Scoble" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > You told me on the phone that you did not want to negotiate. At > least that's > > how I remember hearing it. Sorry if I heard wrong. You told me > specifically > > that PodTech was not in position to negotiate. > > > > > > > > The problem is I'm getting in between you and John Furrier. John's > mom died > > this week which is causing problems figuring out where things are. > > > > > > > > I'll get him to answer you. > > > > > > > > Regarding photo prices, I talked with photographers who work for > Associated > > Press, Business Week and other magazines. > > > > > > > > I agree that we dropped the ball. No excuses there, but I wasn't > involved > > back then and am trying to clean up a mess and having trouble getting it > > cleaned up because of John's mom's death. > > > > > > > > Robert Scoble > > > > > > > > ### > > > > > > > > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Behalf Of Lan Bui > > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:51 PM > > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image? > > > > > > > > Robert, thank you for finally coming out and saying something for > > PodTech to the community. > > > > First, I must say that your statement: > > > > "He believes his work is worth that and believes that there isn't room > > for negotiation on this issue." > > > > Is a lie. > > > > One of the points in my blog post was that I wanted, at minimum, to be > > contacted to negotiate. In the last couple days I did negotiate down a > > lot less than $3000 and even sent an updated invoice for it. So how is > > this not negotiating on the issue? Remember we talked about this on > > the phone, so I'm not sure why you left that out. > > > > PodTech had the chance to ask to purchase a license to use the > > photograph before it was used, at which time they would be able to set > > the terms. That didn't happen. Now that they have used the photograph > > already, who should set the terms? > > > > I gave PodTech over a month to respond to my terms and they didn't. > > When it was just me that was involved PodTech didn't care. When others > > started to blog about it and it was giving them a bad name, then > > PodTech started to care. Remember, that blog post was up for about a > > month before others started take notice to it. So PodTech showed to me > > they don't care about me, they only care about their image in the > > public eye. > > > > Next, I am not Thomas Hawk. Wait... Thomas Hawk? I will be the > > professional and not discuss the prices that PodTech pays him. > > Remember Robert, you told me how much PodTech pays him and that > > reinforced my price even more! > > > > You also said: > > > > "It was easy to see how a mistake was made since usually people in the > > community who, when invited to an event we held usually give us photos > > that were snapped at our events for free" > > > > I was not contacted... so how could there be a mistake regarding > > permission? I also never gave (if you meant sent in to PodTech) any > > photographs that this one could be mistaken for. > > > > You also said: > > > > "it's easy to miss the copyright on Flickr" > > > > Come on, that argument is weak. Putting something in the same place on > > every page on flickr makes it very easy to not miss. > > > > You said: > > > > "I asked several professional photographers, the average fee was > > $300." and "3x what most professionals in the marketplace charge for > > this kind of work" > > > > Please don't lie again. The $300 price point is for stock photography. > > I even asked John where you guys got $300 from and he said "that is > > standard for a stock photograph". If there is a photograph with Casey > > McKinnon holding Vloggies in a stock photography book somewhere I > > would love to see it. The photograph that was chosen was chosen > > because it had great value. It is not stock photography and I am not a > > stock photographer. > > > > Ok, lastly. Lets say I accepted $1000. Wow that sounds like a lot of > > money to many people that aren't making money from their creative > > work. Well this issue is not about me making money. It is about > > setting a precedent. > > > > If we allow companies to steal work and only pay a standard small fee > > when they are discovered, what is the incentive for them not steal > > again? Is that what other companies should learn from this? Just take > > now and deal with it later if it ever comes up. And don't worry, it > > still won't cost more than if we paid up front. > > > > To anyone else reading this: I hope this clarifies and corrects > > Roberts post. > > > > -Lan > > www.LanBui.com > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com > > <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> , "Robert Scoble" > > <robertscoble@> wrote: > > > > > > Here's what happened. > > > > > > > > > > > > An employee made a mistake. We recognize that a mistake was made. > It was > > > easy to see how a mistake was made since usually people in the > community > > > who, when invited to an event we held usually give us photos that were > > > snapped at our events for free and it's easy to miss the copyright on > > > Flickr. Thomas Hawk, for instance, takes lots of photos at our > > events and > > > gives them to us for free since he's appreciative for the community > > work we > > > do. > > > > > > > > > > > > We asked around what a photo like the one that we used by Lan Bui > > was worth. > > > I asked several professional photographers, the average fee was > > $300. Lan > > > was not commissioned to take photos and an employee made a mistake > > by using > > > a photo and not making sure we had the rights to use it before > using it. > > > > > > > > > > > > But Lan wants $3,000. > > > > > > > > > > > > We have offered Lan something between those two prices which we feel > > is fair > > > ($1,000 is the price I saw offered by PodTech CEO John Furrier, > which is > > > more than 3x what most professionals in the marketplace charge for > > this kind > > > of work). > > > > > > > > > > > > Lan wants $3,000. He believes his work is worth that and believes > > that there > > > isn't room for negotiation on this issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > So we're at an impass. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm personally sorry for the whole way this thing has been handled, > > though, > > > and still would like to find a way to get the two parties to reach > > closure > > > on this problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > I do want to make sure Lan gets compensated properly for his > > intellectual > > > property, but we want to reach a fair price and one that's based > on what > > > professionals expect. > > > > > > > > > > > > Robert Scoble > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
