Let me get this straight about Cybernet..

[softball]

I just read this:

2. The undersigned authorizes Cybernet Expo, YNOT Network LP, and event sponsors to copyright and publish any and all photographs, videotapes and/or film in which he/she appears while attending this event. He/she further agrees that YNOT Network LP and event sponsors may transfer, use or caused to be used, these photos, video tapes, or films for any exhibitions, public displays, publications, commercials, art and advertising purposes, and television programs without limitations or reservations.

When I get a model release signed by talent, I am the one paying the bill. This company wants me to pay them, sign a model release, so they can use my (or anyone else's) image for their own commercial purposes.

Does anyone see anything wrong with this? I pay them so they can use my image to make money.

In my world the producer pays the talent so the producer is entitled to earn money off the images.

This is kind of through the looking glass stuff. Would someone please clarify for me why this is included in the terms of purchase?

[JFK]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

I just read this:



When I get a model release signed by talent, I am the one paying the bill. This company wants me to pay them, sign a model release, so they can use my (or anyone else's) image for their own commercial purposes.

Does anyone see anything wrong with this? I pay them so they can use my image to make money.

In my world the producer pays the talent so the producer is entitled to earn money off the images.

This is kind of through the looking glass stuff. Would someone please clarify for me why this is included in the terms of purchase?

Obviously you have not been to too many shows lately. They all have similar disclaimers, eighter signs at the door, or as part of the sign up forms.

[softball]

Originally Posted by JFK

Obviously you have not been to too many shows lately. They all have similar disclaimers, eighter signs at the door, or as part of the sign up forms.

Yes you are right about the fact that I don't go to shows. I don't care whether they all do it or not. I am questioning why I should pay money for you to make money. If I want you to take my picture at a commercial event that I pay for, then get me to sign a generic release. Don't make it a term of entry. Why should I pay money for you to make money? Either that or make it free, then it would make sense.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

Yes you are right about the fact that I don't go to shows. I don't care whether they all do it or not. I am questioning why I should pay money for you to make money. If I want you to take my picture at a commercial event that I pay for, then get me to sign a generic release. Don't make it a term of entry. Why should I pay money for you to make money? Either that or make it free, then it would make sense.

Thats standard even on the B2C shows these days..even the C2C show Im going to this weekend.

[JFK]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

Yes you are right about the fact that I don't go to shows. I don't care whether they all do it or not. I am questioning why I should pay money for you to make money. If I want you to take my picture at a commercial event that I pay for, then get me to sign a generic release. Don't make it a term of entry. Why should I pay money for you to make money? Either that or make it free, then it would make sense.

I dont run the shows, this is just part of the admisson to any of them. If they want to do a pictorical, for later promo, or you happen to be in a video even in the background they want to cover themselfes. So Infact admission to a show constitutes your agreement to have your image used in any promo they decide to do.

[softball]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Thats standard even on the B2C shows these days..even the C2C show Im going to this weekend.

Maybe we should make it the standard for the business. Models pay us and we sell their pictures. I don't care if it is the standard. It sucks. I just wonder why you guys have let them get away with making money off of your images with no reward. Not even a link back at the very least.

[softball]

Originally Posted by JFK

I dont run the shows, this is just part of the admisson to any of them. If they want to do a pictorical, for later promo, or you happen to be in a video even in the background they want to cover themselfes. So Infact admission to a show constitutes your agreement to have your image used in any promo they decide to do.

I understand the logic. But being in the background and being the subject of a promotional picture are two totally different things.

[Hammer]

Dude, you're talking like JFK or anyone else would actually try to make money from a picture of you or any model you brought with you. When would that happen? As far as I know, JFK's website and magazine are free and I don't know of any other commercial photographers that go to the shows. Oh, the guy from Klixxx is usually there running around but they don't make money from the show pics either.

You simply sign the release so the show promoters can use pics that are taken at the show to promote the show next year and not have to worry that if Rhetorical happens to be in one that they have to get his permission.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

I understand the logic. But being in the background and being the subject of a promotional picture are two totally different things.

Are you weasling on going now?

I told you Id buy dinner you fucker!

Honestly no one takes your picture there if you tell them not to.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Honestly no one takes your picture there if you tell them not to.

No, that's not true in Rhetorical's case. I'm sure the paparazzi will be running around snapping photos right and left and using them to make lots of money.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by Hammer

No, that's not true in Rhetorical's case. I'm sure the paparazzi will be running around snapping photos right and left and using them to make lots of money.

You know they made lots of money off of two old guys last year trying to look ghetto.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by gonzo

You know they made lots of money off of two old guys last year trying to look ghetto.

Shocker

[miz_wright]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

I just read this:
[snipped from YNOT site]
When I get a model release signed by talent, I am the one paying the bill. This company wants me to pay them, sign a model release, so they can use my (or anyone else's) image for their own commercial purposes.

Does anyone see anything wrong with this? I pay them so they can use my image to make money.

In my world the producer pays the talent so the producer is entitled to earn money off the images.

This is kind of through the looking glass stuff. Would someone please clarify for me why this is included in the terms of purchase?

*shrug* I consider it SOP for CYA purposes - a snapshot of a bunch of webmasters hanging out at the bar so they can say "Hey look at the good times at the last one" is the general end result. And the PITA that would result from taking that snap, then having to go get signatures from every person in the bar? Bleh: not worth it.

Plus, let's be honest: a lot of folks, industry-wide love trolling the pix after a show, and this give the show-throwers the opportunity to be able to provide that.

[softball]

Originally Posted by Hammer

No, that's not true in Rhetorical's case. I'm sure the paparazzi will be running around snapping photos right and left and using them to make lots of money.

As far as I know, JFK's website and magazine are free

There are no free websites. Come on, Hammer, you've been around. And you are deflecting the issue. It has nothing to do with me, its the principle. It could be anyone caught in a compromising situation and we are not talking about background here. Fact is they want a model release from you to use your pictures for commercial reasons. Now please tell me that is not the case.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

Fact is they want a model release from you to use your pictures for commercial reasons. Now please tell me that is not the case.

My pictures have shown up many times in Klixxx magazine, on JFK's website as well as other places so I have no problem with signing the form. But I'm not famous either so maybe if I was Jenna Jameson I might think a little about signing but still, my point is that the commercial reasons you are talking about only involve promoting a website that they make sponsor money from or a magazine they make advertising money from or to promote the next convention. In none of those cases do I see anyone profiting directly from anyone's photos.

[softball]

Originally Posted by Hammer

My pictures have shown up many times in Klixxx magazine, on JFK's website as well as other places so I have no problem with signing the form. But I'm not famous either so maybe if I was Jenna Jameson I might think a little about signing but still, my point is that the commercial reasons you are talking about only involve promoting a website that they make sponsor money from or a magazine they make advertising money from or to promote the next convention. In none of those cases do I see anyone profiting directly from anyone's photos.

JFK makes a profit from this. At the moment we have a case in point. Joe Francis. This should make some sense to you. He filmed that girl years ago for zip and is set to make millions. If something similar happened at any convention, someone other than the original subject could make out like a bandit. This is all commercial and I am not quite sure how you can say no profits are made.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

JFK makes a profit from this. At the moment we have a case in point. Joe Francis. This should make some sense to you. He filmed that girl years ago for zip and is set to make millions. If something similar happened at any convention, someone other than the original subject could make out like a bandit. This is all commercial and I am not quite sure how you can say no profits are made.

As far as I know, JFK is paid by the company he works for to take pictures. But those pictures appear on Fubar and in their magazine, both of which are free. Just be sure not to get caught giving Gonzo a blowjob and I'm sure you'll be fine.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by Hammer

Just be sure not to get caught giving Gonzo a blowjob and I'm sure you'll be fine.

I dont hang out in adult theatres.

[softball]

Originally Posted by Hammer

As far as I know, JFK is paid by the company he works for to take pictures. But those pictures appear on Fubar and in their magazine, both of which are free. Just be sure not to get caught giving Gonzo a blowjob and I'm sure you'll be fine.

So this is a round about way of agreeing that profit is made. It took a few posts, but you finally get my point.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

So this is a round about way of agreeing that profit is made. It took a few posts, but you finally get my point.

I never said no one made any profit. I said they don't profit directly from a photo of me or you at a show. We might end up in a photo they use for promotion at some time and if I have to conceded that yes, the people behind Cybernet may make a profit from the show and by using a photo of me on the website next year they are profiting from me at my expense, then I concede. I seriously doubt anyone would decide to go to a show just because they saw a photo of me though.

Now, if you're going to get drunk and pass out in a toilet with your pants around your ankles or pass out at the Splash bar and end up with a bunch of idiots putting mustard on your bald head, you may want to have your attorney ad a clause to your special contract.

MustardBoy... er, I mean MediaGuy knows what I mean I'm sure.

[miz_wright]

Originally Posted by Hammer

I[snipped for BLAH BLAH BLAH] I seriously doubt anyone would decide to go to a show just because they saw a photo of me though.[/snip]

... see, that's where you're wrong, Hammer. I TOTALLY would, if it were up to me

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by LizAEBN

... see, that's where you're wrong, Hammer. I TOTALLY would, if it were up to me

Uh oh, Liz, Gonzo might have a problem then because I never signed a contract to post here.

[JFK]

Originally Posted by Hammer

I never said no one made any profit. I said they don't profit directly from a photo of me or you at a show. We might end up in a photo they use for promotion at some time and if I have to conceded that yes, the people behind Cybernet may make a profit from the show and by using a photo of me on the website next year they are profiting from me at my expense, then I concede. I seriously doubt anyone would decide to go to a show just because they saw a photo of me though.

Now, if you're going to get drunk and pass out in a toilet with your pants around your ankles or pass out at the Splash bar and end up with a bunch of idiots putting mustard on your bald head, you may want to have your attorney ad a clause to your special contract.

MustardBoy... er, I mean MediaGuy knows what I mean I'm sure.

Media guy had more than his FAIR share of adverse publicity, but he has turned it around in his favour. Yes, I have shots of LC passed out in a toilet with pants around his ankles and the door open. It was removed even though he didnt care.

If you get drunk and cut up, you are fair game. That is why I have "removed by request" or if you really dont want to be in shots, just pull me aside and ask. I cant be bothered to force the issue. Takes longer for an argument than for me to take 10 more shots of people who want to be in them.

[softball]

Originally Posted by JFK

Media guy had more than his FAIR share of adverse publicity, but he has turned it around in his favour. Yes, I have shots of LC passed out in a toilet with pants around his ankles and the door open. It was removed even though he didnt care.

If you get drunk and cut up, you are fair game. That is why I have "removed by request" or if you really dont want to be in shots, just pull me aside and ask. I cant be bothered to force the issue. Takes longer for an argument than for me to take 10 more shots of people who want to be in them.

I am glad you have finally come to that conclusion.

[connor]

Hey guys -

Wasn't around yesterday, so I'm just catching up on threads and email and what not.

Rhetorical, I get some of the frustration you're expressing... but you make it sound like shows are going to shoot pictorial spreads of your models and then start a website or sell them to Playboy or something. That isn't the case. Shows use these pictures as explained to you before... so they can show people NEXT year what went on the previous years. That benefits the shows, sure, but it also benefits the people who attend the shows. It's a minor, minor thing.

If you DO bring a model with you to a show, you DO get benefit from pictures of your model at the show circulating in industry circles. I can't imagine the businessperson who would have an opportunity to get his or her model in front of thousands of industry eyeballs and NOT want this free publicity. In what way would that make sense? So even if you don't get a "link back," you ARE getting benefit. Probably more benefit than the show gets, to be honest.

And what are you going to do when a model steps into an area viewable by the public and someone snaps a picture and includes it in news shots? Nothing, that's what you'll do... unless you like giving your money away to attorneys who can't help you. Why doesn't THAT bother you? YNOT or AVN could snap pictures of you or your model as part of their coverage of the event and there isn't anything you can do about it. They don't even ask for a release cause they don't need one. And don't news sites profit from their content? Sure they do. So shows including this language is really just yet another way to make sure people understand what COULD happen if they choose to attend events.

I like being outraged as much as the next guy, but I just don't see the specific concerns you mentioned being very significant. Better to invest your outrage in something more important and substantial, imho.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by connor

Better to invest your outrage in something more important and substantial, imho.

Ah, you don't know Rhetorical too well I see.

You know I love ya Graham, just saying.

[TheEnforcer]

This is one of those sound and fury signifying nothing type posts/threads... :>))

SOP for shows and has been for all types be they adult or mainstream.

[LAJ]

I think the jig is up Connor... we now may need to rely solely on running the show responsibly and trying to earn our salary thru sponsorships and badge sales only

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by LAJ

I think the jig is up Connor... we now may need to rely solely on running the show responsibly and trying to earn our salary thru sponsorships and badge sales only

Hammer and I want our old guys looking ghetto cut.

An a bonus for me from pissing on Joanna Angel in public.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Hammer and I want our old guys looking ghetto cut.

An a bonus for me from pissing on Joanna Angel in public.

Yeah, what's up with that. I never signed any damn release last year. Gonzo, I know they used that Joanna Angel stuff for marketing. Hell, everyone was talking about it the rest of the show.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by Hammer

Yeah, what's up with that. I never signed any damn release last year. Gonzo, I know they used that Joanna Angel stuff for marketing. Hell, everyone was talking about it the rest of the show.

I feel used.

LAJ was pimping us out as two old ghettoish guys.
I feel foolish.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by gonzo

I feel used.

LAJ was pimping us out as two old ghettoish guys.
I feel foolish.

But it was Legacy that called us old ghetto farts.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by Hammer

But it was Legacy that called us old ghetto farts.

Yeah I guess he was mad. You know those Walmart hawaiian shirts get trumped every time by a nice silk daniel cremieux.

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by LizAEBN

*

Plus, let's be honest: a lot of folks, industry-wide love trolling the pix after a show, and this give the show-throwers the opportunity to be able to provide that.

I do, but I promise I won't look at ANY pictures with certain people (who shall remain nameles, lest I trip some sort of promotional payout scheme for fame and fortune using his/her/its name.)

I do, however, enjoy keeping track of that donut stealing fat bastard that shall also remain nameless. It's always fun to see what fine chic he's pushing up against, who is trying to appear friendly, but making sure he doesn't really touch any vital part of her......

[Hell Puppy]

I dont really like the policy, but it is what it is. I dont need my fat ugly ass plastered all over, consider it my gift to society and blindness prevention. JFK has got a couple of heinous ones of me.

But it's SOP, it's typically the same even for mainstream shows now. If they snap a pic, they want to be free to use it however they see fit without any legal BS.

Now in reality, I've never seen a shooter of any type, including JFK, at these shows who wont steer away if you just politely let 'em know you dont wanna be photographed.

[softball]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

I dont really like the policy, but it is what it is. I dont need my fat ugly ass plastered all over, consider it my gift to society and blindness prevention. JFK has got a couple of heinous ones of me.

But it's SOP, it's typically the same even for mainstream shows now. If they snap a pic, they want to be free to use it however they see fit without any legal BS.

Now in reality, I've never seen a shooter of any type, including JFK, at these shows who wont steer away if you just politely let 'em know you dont wanna be photographed.

wrong. I asked JFK politely to not shoot me, he did and it took me three weeks to get my pic removed. Then he did it again at a gfy christmas party.....same thing. three weeks to get it removed. He doesn't give a shit. He told me i should not be ashamed of working in porn. I wasnt, but at that time I could have lost.....say.....sixty thousand dollars because of his pictures. It was simple, Julius don't take my picture. No big deal. I have been taking pictures long before Julius got his first camera and I really do not appreciate an amateur snapper trying to teach me my business. Happy snaps are fine. They make money and pay his rent, but he is not a photographer. And don't fuck with people that don't want to be snapped at porn parties. Dude, you are not a journalist. You are a hack with a camera that has carved out a niche. but we both know that, right Julius?