Walmart and other Corps are getting so sneaky with their Terms and Conditions by flavouring them with as much legal fluff as they can get away with, hoping no-one reads and understands their implications that isn't it about time we all make our own legally binding T&C's to protect us from all this and not be taken advantage of.

In an overly litigious society that hates Walmart (but still shops there for some reason), it doesn't surprise me that they'd have a clause like this in their service agreement, nor can I really blame them for doing so. They get sued for looking at people the wrong way, so this seems to me to be simply a CYA move on their part... and a justifiable one at that.

If you're upset about it, don't blame Walmart. They're just making sure they won't get sued when some propaganda-fed disgruntled employee leaks a customer's photograph into the public domain in retaliation for the company not giving their lazy ass an undeserved raise.

But I digress...

We often hear a mentality around here that goes something like "if you have nothing to hide then the surveillance shouldn't alarm you". Within two posts this thought is successfully shown to have a flaw in its logic.

By the same turn, people must begin imagining what could one day be done with a digital image.

I have had issues with this kind of ownership of photographs. EVERYWHERE you go to have your picture taken by a professional photographer, he/she maintains the rights to "their" pictures. This is to ensure that if you want more copies, you have to go back to them.

I found this out when trying to do a copy print of a picture at walmart (this was a school picture of my kids) and the employee of the photo lab noticed the small logos behind the originals and informed me that if I proceeded with the copying, it would be copyright infringement. I left and went to another store and was carefull not to show the logos

All licensed/ professional Photographs keeps the rights to all of their work. it's not just Walmart. At least in my area.

On a side note, I had something similar years ago about a dog, yes! a dog. I went to a pet store to buy a Cocker Spaniel for my wife ($550+tx). They made me sign a declaration that prohibited me from breeding her with another dog because the breeders where it came from kept the "rights" to breed them. UNREAL!!!

Originally posted by Teye22
I have had issues with this kind of ownership of photographs. EVERYWHERE you go to have your picture taken by a professional photographer, he/she maintains the rights to "their" pictures. This is to ensure that if you want more copies, you have to go back to them.

I found this out when trying to do a copy print of a picture at walmart (this was a school picture of my kids) and the employee of the photo lab noticed the small logos behind the originals and informed me that if I proceeded with the copying, it would be copyright infringement. I left and went to another store and was carefull not to show the logos

All licensed/ professional Photographs keeps the rights to all of their work. it's not just Walmart. At least in my area.

On a side note, I had something similar years ago about a dog, yes! a dog. I went to a pet store to buy a Cocker Spaniel for my wife ($550+tx). They made me sign a declaration that prohibited me from breeding her with another dog because the breeders where it came from kept the "rights" to breed them. UNREAL!!!

That's so cool that you got away with copyright infringement!

Maybe you should have just save some trouble by purchasing a couple thousand dollars in equipment, software and training/schooling, then just take the picture yourself. Just to make sure those greedy photographers can't make more money and really 'stick it to the man'.

BTW, while you got away with one, just remember... you put others at risk when you do these things. Where ever you did this, the owners of that store can ultimately be held responsible for what you did. So you just literally risked people's jobs and business' money, just to save a buck or two and do something illegal. Great...

When I was in high school, my buddy worked at a photo developing shop, think it was a kodak one. They would look at all the pictures they were developing, and make copies for themselves of any they liked. Can't even tell you how many hot nudes that guy used to pass around when he came to hit the giant waterbo..... Get a digital camera and printer guys, I am seriously doubting that is an isolated incident.

Originally posted by Teye22
I have had issues with this kind of ownership of photographs. EVERYWHERE you go to have your picture taken by a professional photographer, he/she maintains the rights to "their" pictures. This is to ensure that if you want more copies, you have to go back to them.

I found this out when trying to do a copy print of a picture at walmart (this was a school picture of my kids) and the employee of the photo lab noticed the small logos behind the originals and informed me that if I proceeded with the copying, it would be copyright infringement. I left and went to another store and was carefull not to show the logos

All licensed/ professional Photographs keeps the rights to all of their work. it's not just Walmart. At least in my area.

On a side note, I had something similar years ago about a dog, yes! a dog. I went to a pet store to buy a Cocker Spaniel for my wife ($550+tx). They made me sign a declaration that prohibited me from breeding her with another dog because the breeders where it came from kept the "rights" to breed them. UNREAL!!!

As an amateur photographer, I have invested in several thousand £'s of equipment, and training. Spent long hours practising and perfecting my skills. Are you saying that I shouldn't be recompensated for my time, effort, training and skill?

I assume then, that you also work for free.

This is a reply for Retirednature and BMorris (and all with the same point)

First of all, I must say that I agree with both your points (almost the same). I do understand that the equipment is expensive, I have family members as well as friends that are photographs now (not at that time, this was over 5 years ago when I did that copy. and it was 1 single copy and I have never done that again because we found another solution).

Of course you should be compensated for your hard & great work, isn't that why the prices are EXTREMELY HIGH to hire a photograph (Cost me 1000$ for my wedding). As mentioned this was a school picture so I did not hire him/her personally. They went there a for a few hundred students. But when I already paid over 100$ for only a couple of shots, and when I receive them I realize that I forgot 1 picture for my grand parents (OK my bad).

I would have to pay 20-25$ for ONE 8X10 picture of MY kids (extra from the predetermined bundle of course) and wait a couple of weeks to get it, I didn't have a lot of money and a copy print only cost like 5-7$. Seemed like the logical thing to me then but at the time, I was not aware about the copyright thing. until the guy told me ...

We found out later that we could order digital copies (we get them by email faster) and we can have them printed as many times as we want....legally too.

So although I agree that equipment is really expensive, when you go and take pictures of 500+ kids in a single school (and that photograph takes pics in ALL of the schools in the area), I find the prices too high for extras as they make tons of money with those contracts...so as I said we started opting for the digital copy and everyone is happy.

I have nothing against keeping rights on your work...but my family's faces, I should have ALL the rights over!

I'm so tired of the 'fine print' arguement, you're agreeing to it! You wouldn't sign a contract without reading it and this is no different.

well its false to say they are taking your property. you have to literally sign away the rights to your photos.

small print isnt very nice, but you cant get mad for not wanting to read it.

Originally posted by Goldcurrent
Wal-Mart is just scum. Plain and simple. Wanting to own the rights to the photographs you 'the customer' pays to process is just more whipped topping to the empire of evil.

I have boycotted this corporate menace for years. I don't understand why everyone else doesn't? Oh right. Semi-inexpensive goods made cheaply, by Chinese labourers. All the plastic crap and disposable electronics all at pennies cheaper than the competition. Just scum.

100% correct. Why do people keep buying all that CHEAP crap from China? do you think quantity is quality or something?

Myself, I would not buy there if they were handing out free boomkins, vangs or jennys.

pimpsonque,,,,,,i mean Simpson Sears.

Originally posted by BMorris

Originally posted by Teye22
I found this out when trying to do a copy print of a picture at walmart (this was a school picture of my kids) and the employee of the photo lab noticed the small logos behind the originals and informed me that if I proceeded with the copying, it would be copyright infringement.

As an amateur photographer, I have invested in several thousand £'s of equipment, and training. Spent long hours practising and perfecting my skills. Are you saying that I shouldn't be recompensated for my time, effort, training and skill?

I assume then, that you also work for free.

I have no dog in this fight, but would like to ask you a question. The school photographer in the above case had already been compensated for their time, effort, training, and skill when the photos were originally ordered and paid for. How in the blue hell does making a copy of the end product, after already paying for it, impact that photographer in the least?