Digital BW, The Print

2 spaces open in Dec. print exchange.

* due Dec. 31
* please email me offline to take space or ask for more details.

cheers,

Tom O'Connell

Tom, et al-

I opened an e-mail today with some dismay.

It was from a person that had bought one of my prints 
from "collection in a shop...."  He was, quite innocently, asking 
where the photo was taken.

My question to all is this:

1.  Has anyone else run into this?

2.  Do all involved understand that the people participating in the 
exchange still have original copyright of their own work?

3.  SURELY, the people selling the photos know it's illegal.  I am 
trying to track down "the shop" now and will let all know if I 
locate it.

Seth

> "Tom OConnell" <tomoc@y...> wrote:
> 
> 2 spaces open in Dec. print exchange.
> 
> * due Dec. 31
> * please email me offline to take space or ask for more details.
>

> Tom, et al-
>
> I opened an e-mail today with some dismay.
>
> It was from a person that had bought one of my prints
> from "collection in a shop...."  He was, quite innocently, asking
> where the photo was taken.
>
> My question to all is this:
>
> 1.  Has anyone else run into this?
>
> 2.  Do all involved understand that the people participating in the
> exchange still have original copyright of their own work?
>
> 3.  SURELY, the people selling the photos know it's illegal.  I am
> trying to track down "the shop" now and will let all know if I
> locate it.
>
> Seth

I've never really followed the print exchange stuff, but...:

Do the members of the exchange permanently exchange the prints?

If so, was there an agreement prints wouldn't be sold/resold?

If not, then it's hard to see what the problem is.

The (new/current) owner of a print is usually free to sell/resell that
physical print. It has nothing (or very little) to do with copyright.

Unless we have an agreement to the contrary - if you sell, give, exchange,
barter a print with me, I am free to sell that physical print. There is no
violation of copyright - at it's simplest, no copy has been made. The
original photographer still owns the copyright.

So it comes down to what the agreement among the print exchange members (of
course if the prints are meant to be finally returned to the owner then it's
straight theft - but again, nothing to do with copyright). It might be bad
form, but other than that....

(BTW - I'd add I am a vigorous defender of copyright for photographers)

tim a



(I have an friendly print exchange every now and then with a fellow
photographer. We have an informal tongue in cheek agreement that neither of
us will sell the work until the other photographers work is going for over
$100,000 at auction....  - mind you, I might be the winner on that one as
his work has just been taken on by a gallery that sells Struths and
Winogrands and Friedlanders...)