Who owns the photo if.....?
Thursday December 14, 2006
I just attended a meeting with a representative from FNIS (Fidelity National Information Services®), the providers of our Paragon MLS software service. She was presenting some new products and services. One of these was free, so naturally it was well-accepted.
Basically, Paragon would place a watermark on all photos in the MLS saying something like ©Taos County Assn. of REALTORS®. Now I've long been capable of placing my own watermarks on photos with very inexpensive software, but rarely take the time. And I do know that there are concerns about those outside the MLS using the photos without permission.
My problem is who has the rights if I allow this notice on my listing photos? I surely want to retain my rights and the ability to license them out where I so choose. Do I still hold the rights to the original photo? Or is this just another example of our giving up rights and value in return for a quick cheap solution to a problem? Or am I a nit-picker?
You are not a nitpicker. My MLS (Realcomp II) actually forces us to give them the copyright to the main mls photo. That means lazy agents can reuse other agent’s exterior photo. The MLS allows this. It enrages me.
Maureen:
Thanks for the comment. I sometimes get intense about things that don’t seem to matter to others. I appreciate a kindred spirit.
It really irks me. I’ve spent $2000 on a nice Nikon and a wide angle lens and take the time to shoot my home photos either early in the morning or late in the evening and I’ve seen other agents use my photos on the MLS. I usually write them a nasty letter and tell them to go shoot their own. I keep all of my photos online and have started to use watermarks on them.
I have just had this same thing happen, the worst part was I was knifed by the wife of a managing broker of a City of Chicago office who is also an agent. She somehow contacted my sellers, and told them all the things I had done wrong and they were the reasons the house had not sold. (no maps in the house? ) Nothing to do with the really poor condition or unheated second floor attic. She now has the listing, refused to even give me a ref. and used my pictures. My only good Karma out of all this is the fact that she has inherited a screamer husband attorney seller, and a house that will never sell at the current price, and set herself up by not telling them the things or price that were the real reason the house has not sold.
This is a difficult question to answer to everyones satisfaction. I take the photo and allow the use of them on MLS and other advertisements for the listing. Once the listing is sold, cancelled or otherwise changes its original state then all the rights return to the photographer (RE Agent or otherwise). That is my understanding of copy right law. MLS however uses the same images for a re-listing by a second agent as a matter of course. Personally I do not agree with MLS on secondary use but it is difficult for an individual to prevent them from doing it. Or is there??
Thanks for the comment John. My MLS doesn’t re-use photos, so I try to take them down just before I place the property as sold, expired or withdrawn.
If I couldn’t do that, I would probably go back to using AIS Watermarker software. It allows me to fade the watermark to invisibility and bring it out any time. So, I would probably keep it faded while I had the listing. Then, just before losing it, I would bring it out to prominence. Let them use it all they want with my name on it!
That sounds like a great idea. Our MLS has the only access to placement or removal of photos used. They will not allow images with a copyright symbol, trademark or other identification. They just will not get posted. All images uploaded to the MLS stay in their files and can be reloaded by the next agent listing that property, unless they upload replacements. Have asked about this policy and was told that their lawyers have assured them that they have that right. I just got a call in the last few days from an agent who asked why my photos were showing up on the re-listing (a different agent) when they had paid for the photos in the first place. Not only that but the floor plans which were also paid for by the first agent was reused. The first agent had spent just shy of $1,000 for the floor plans and photos and feels put out (rightly so).