Los-Angeles-Shooter Loc: Los Angeles

the following from ugly hedgehog terms of service amounts to an unfair rights grab. It's unfair to many photographers, and unfair to many models. Some photographers don't mind giving ugly hedgehog an eternal license to do whatever he wants with their photos. I am bothered by that demand. I also note that members give up the right to take legal action if ugly hedgehog exceeds even this overly broad parameters.

SUBMISSIONS

Visitor agrees as a condition of viewing, that any communication between Visitor and Website is deemed a submission. By making a submission, Visitor grants the administration and the owners of the Website a worldwide, non-exclusive, irrevocable, royalty-free, sub-licenseable and transferable license to use in any way, reproduce and distribute the submission and prepare derivative works of the submission without further permission. This includes commercial and non-commercial use of all submissions, including portions thereof, graphics contained thereon, or any of the content of the submission. Visitor agrees to only communicate that information to the Website, which it wishes to forever allow the Website to use in any manner as it sees fit. "Submissions" is also a provision of the Privacy Policy.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Why stop at nudes? This might be a reason to cease posting any work.
--Bob

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Although my shots are generally not good enough to "pirate", I am bothered by that as well, and will consider that before posting more photos.

Los-Angeles-Shooter Loc: Los Angeles

good point.
Another aspect is that a model might feel the photographer is being unfair to her, if the photographer gives ugly hedgehog a wildly broad license that exceeds the agreement between photographer and model.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I understand that. UHH becomes a tertiary partner to any agreement you may have with your model(s).

Some of my posts are of work that has been sold for a fairly decent price. Those prints are sold with the understanding that I can, and will, post electronic versions of the images to various photographic web sites. I can also produce and sell, loan, gift, etc. those prints as I see fit. With this agreement that you posted, the site can make prints and sell them for profit, or use them as they see fit. There again, becoming a tertiary partner without my client(s) or I desiring one.

I wonder how long this site would stay up if everyone stopped posting images.
--Bob

dat2ra Loc: Sacramento

I agree completely. I was not aware that UHH owned the rights to submissions. As I understand it, a photographer retains the copyright even if a photo is published in a book or magazine. I have published photos and have given permission to the publisher to do so. I did not sign away my rights. Any legal types here?

focuspuller

To be clear, I believe the photographer retains the copyright, but by submitting to the website you are granting a license to the website to use the photo as it sees fit.

dat2ra Loc: Sacramento

How does that work with Adobe Stock? If someone pays to download a photo, can they then use it as they see fit for as long as they want, including re-selling it?

RonBoyd

There are some things that I would like add but, now, feel too intimidated to put it out there. I believe I will just be a Lurker from now on.

(Yeah, I was aware that anything put on the Internet is "free game"... and there forever. However, actually agreeing to that is something beyond my tolerance level.)

dat2ra Loc: Sacramento

I sent a note to UHH asking for further explaination. I'll post their response.

focuspuller

I don't know. Check the Adobe Stock TOU. Absent something specifically granted, I would think not, but I am not a lawyer. As long as your copyright metadata is preserved, you are clearly the owner, I would think.

whitewolfowner

Would be interesting to hear what a lawyer would have to say about this; I know we have some here on the hog. Most here, I am sure respect others rights when they post a photo as I do but to say you have the right ot do as you please with any photo posted; seems to me is a violation of ones rights. Let's hope one of our lawyer friends here sees this thread and gives us a legal opinion.

Los-Angeles-Shooter Loc: Los Angeles

the photographer does retain copyright. However the ugly hedgehog TOS gives an unlimited "license" for UH to do anything he wants with the image including commercial use… Forever.

focuspuller

In all fairness, the TOU is plain as day. I am guilty of not checking before posting, so I cannot complain except to not post a photo again, which is shame. Kind of defeats one of the purposes of the site.

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

I have to admit that I had not read the TOU. And I just did. I will miss your posts, Los-Angeles, even those without nudes. These terms do seem quite lopsided. I understand the need to protect the website from postings that may contain work not owned by the posting individual but these terms seemingly allow UHH to take ownership of any submission - text and images. Well I have posted 4 images. Any that I have where I would like to retain ownership will not be posted here. {And no snippets from my upcoming novel either!}

Posting a link to images that are hosted on one's own site would not come under these TOU as this site would not ever have the images. And your own site could have its own TOU where YOU retain the rights. This brings up an interesting question about other sites that allow the posting of images and what their TOU are.

I also wonder how long the site would stay up ( by which I mean sell banner ads ) without images.

And this should also be the Chit-Chat section - not all of us "read" this section.