Student Photographer Threatened With Suspension For Sports Photos 379
sandbagger writes: Anthony Mazur is a senior at Flower Mound High School in Texas who photographed school sports games and other events. Naturally he posted them on line. A few days ago he was summoned to the principal's office and threatened with a suspension and 'reporting to the IRS' if he didn't take those 4000 photos down. Reportedly, the principal's rationale was that the school has copyright on the images and not him.
OK, we've seen this before (Score:5, Insightful)
So, another thread about some random clueless school principal.
Look, the vast majority of us (at least the non-ACs) have already graduated from high school. We know that your average principal has to check the school policy manual to figure out which leg to put in the trouser first. And then they mess it up half the time anyway.
Not much to see here. Some lawyer will be around presently to wack some sense into the the school district.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This is true. There is another side to this. The school is so afraid of being sued they create lawsuits trying to 'fix' the issue. So he used that excuse to go on a powertrip over a kid. Working on the yearbook... Which makes you think was one of those 4k the principal doing something he shouldnt be?
Re: OK, we've seen this before (Score:2, Funny)
> your average principal has to check the school policy manual to figure out which leg to put in the trouser first. And then they mess it up half the time anyway.
So if the manual says to put your left leg in first, and you mess up and put your right leg in first -- exactly what badness happens?
(If this were the Hokey Pokey then I'd understand how doing this might cause the end of civilization. But for trousers, no.)
Re: OK, we've seen this before (Score:5, Insightful)
> your average principal has to check the school policy manual to figure out which leg to put in the trouser first. And then they mess it up half the time anyway.
So if the manual says to put your left leg in first, and you mess up and put your right leg in first -- exactly what badness happens?
The zipper winds up in the back.
Re: OK, we've seen this before (Score:5, Funny)
> your average principal has to check the school policy manual to figure out which leg to put in the trouser first. And then they mess it up half the time anyway.
So if the manual says to put your left leg in first, and you mess up and put your right leg in first -- exactly what badness happens?
The zipper winds up in the back.
And for a school administrator as full of shit as this guy is, that might not be a bad thing...
Re: OK, we've seen this before (Score:5, Funny)
Equal rights for centaurs now!
Re: OK, we've seen this before (Score:5, Funny)
what a bigoted, able-ist post. why do you assume everyone has 2 legs, shitlord?
You must be new here. Here on /. we say "you insensitive clod". We do have our traditions you know.
Re: (Score:3)
what a bigoted, able-ist post. why do you assume everyone has 2 legs, shitlord?
So now metaphors have to be politically correct?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It is becoming clearer and clearer every day that our schools are run by absolute morons. You know the kind I'm talking about. They manage to reach their Peter Principal level and proceed to be incompetent in all areas.
Re: (Score:3)
Unless it was part of a contract..... (Score:5, Interesting)
Unless photography rights was part of a contract (either student handbook or admission ticket), the principal is smoking crack and has no claim to them.
That said, the kid is probably a minor and can not enter into binding contracts without parental consent.
Re: (Score:3)
While all that's true, he didn't have a release from the athletes to post their likeness online. That's usually part of the standard parent signature form in athletics (I assume - I'm no athlete) but that would only affect photos taken under authority of the school. So the school has no standing, but the students and their parents might.
Doesn't need one at a PUBLIC event. He only needs it if doing photos in private, restricted areas - e.g the locker room.
Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Insightful)
Threats of lawsuits are mostly idle. Call his bluff and see what happens when the ACLU gets involved and crowfunding his defense sends the principal looking for a new job..
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Interesting)
Is this "evil student" charging, or making ad revenue, for views of said photos? Is the lighting on campus somehow owned by the school district and they forgot to charge for it? Just have some CS students wipe out the principal's iPhone, and he'll have something more important to do than not understand Fair Use media.
I'd say put them under a password and then not offer them to the yearbook crew. Everyone copyright your memory! Let's copyright old cigarette butts and empty bags of potato chips! IP is IP!
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Informative)
He is a taking a yearbook class, using the schools equipment, and at the end of the year the book will be sold to the students. If the school did it correctly his parents would have signed a consent form giving the school the rights to the work for publication in the yearbook. The question is did they give the school ownership of the copyright like work for hire, exclusive publication rights for a time period, or just nonexclusive rights to publish the work?
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Informative)
He is a taking a yearbook class, using the schools equipment, and at the end of the year the book will be sold to the students. If the school did it correctly his parents would have signed a consent form giving the school the rights to the work for publication in the yearbook. The question is did they give the school ownership of the copyright like work for hire, exclusive publication rights for a time period, or just nonexclusive rights to publish the work?
From the article:
In addition, the District’s Board Policy Manual explicitly states “a student shall retain all rights to work created as part of the instruction or using District technology resources.”
Re: (Score:3)
otherwise every kid that snapped a picture or wrote an article that ended up in a yearbook or school newspaper would have a copyright claim. At some point they have to grant use to the school.
if the picture "ends up in the school newspaper" then the photographer has explicitly or implicitly granted the publication right to the yearbook. The pictures do not just magically appear there, the photographers must provide the yearbook with the pictures.
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Interesting)
If you bothered to read the article, or the summary above, you might notice that there's no threat of a lawsuit, only of a suspension. The burden (and expense) of filing a lawsuit would be on the kid (and his parents). And while they might win, odds are, they couldn't possibly hope to recover the $100k+ in legal fees.
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Interesting)
there's no threat of a lawsuit, only of a suspension.
if there is no threat of a lawsuit, which is the only legal mechanism that the school can use to have the pictures taken down, then the school would not have threatened the kid with suspension. The suspension is not a legal relief for the posting of the photographs, a lawsuit is.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Informative)
they couldn't possibly hope to recover the $100k+ in legal fees.
$100,000? That's just a tiny bit inflated. My legal fees for two felonies were slightly more than $5,000. It's not going to cost six digits to get judicial relief in a circumstance like this. It probably doesn't even get the lawsuit stage, a demand letter sent to the school district and reviewed by their attorney would probably suffice. "Yeah, we're going to lose this one. Wipe the student's record clean, tell him you're sorry, and move on."
There's plenty of stupidity in the American legal system to make fun of without making stuff up.
Were they felonies where you confessed guilt or that were fairly routine? 100K might be a bit inflated, but not necessarily if you were to go all the way to trial... you have civil discovery costs on both sides and over 4000 photos, plus electronics experts on posting, plus the cost of motion practice, plus trial time, plus appeals. It really depends who you get to do the case, but it could certainly go to $30K pretty easily, and $100K under certain circumstances.
That being said, it's likely 5K before settlement.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Funny)
As a former troublemaker, I never understood how suspension is a punishment. I considered a three day vacation from school to be supreme good fortune.
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
That’s why many schools now do the “In-School Suspension”. Sit in the principals’ office and work all day on the mounds of homework the teachers send down. Not quite as much fun as the vacation format.
I happened to get in school suspension when I was in school 30 years ago. Sat in a classroom with all the other trouble makers and was handed a sheet where all my teachers had written my work load on it. Only then did I realize how little I was actually doing in high school. Each day, only half the classes had anything of substance written for them, including homework, and I was done with that by 10 AM. I spent the rest of the day reading books for English "extra credit" or drawing for art "extra credit" as
Re: (Score:3)
Install a keylogger.
Well they all sound fun. But the keylogger one will land you in jail for quite a long time these days.
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Interesting)
As a former troublemaker, I never understood how suspension is a punishment. I considered a three day vacation from school to be supreme good fortune.
You're, apparently, not the only one and why one of my English teachers got her Ph.D. on the concept of Saturday Suspension in the late-1960s, early-1970s, where you have to go to school on Saturday (or a series of Saturdays) as punishment. I really disliked Dr. Kershes!
Re: (Score:3)
As a former troublemaker, I never understood how suspension is a punishment. I considered a three day vacation from school to be supreme good fortune.
You're, apparently, not the only one and why one of my English teachers got her Ph.D. on the concept of Saturday Suspension in the late-1960s, early-1970s, where you have to go to school on Saturday (or a series of Saturdays) as punishment. I really disliked Dr. Kershes!
Or as in the '80s the movie the "Breakfast Club" (of course not realistic). However, there are some actual real school districts that implement Saturday School [principals.org].
Re: (Score:3)
As a former troublemaker, I never understood how suspension is a punishment. I considered a three day vacation from school to be supreme good fortune.
You're, apparently, not the only one and why one of my English teachers got her Ph.D. on the concept of Saturday Suspension in the late-1960s, early-1970s, where you have to go to school on Saturday (or a series of Saturdays) as punishment. I really disliked Dr. Kershes!
Or as in the '80s the movie the "Breakfast Club" (of course not realistic). However, there are some actual real school districts that implement Saturday School [principals.org].
What? Did you think Dr. Kershes's idea (and Ph.D. from the late 60s, early 70s) wasn't implemented by the 1980s? I met the hag in 1983 and Saturday Suspension was alive and well in northern Virginia by then. I know, I had her for 6th grade English and after spending a Saturday in detention (which I had never heard of as an option before then) found out a week or two later that it was her dissertation that more-or-less created the practice. The Breakfast Club hadn't begun principle photography when Saturday
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Insightful)
Threats of lawsuits are mostly idle. Call his bluff and see what happens when the ACLU gets involved and crowfunding his defense sends the principal looking for a new job..
Don't call his bluff.
A principal has all kinds of power over your life as a student. Litigation takes time. And a principal can easily destroy your chances of getting into college or tarnish your record (before litigation can straighten everything out)
Get a school board parent on your side, preferably someone with a law degree, or married to someone with a law degree. Or barring that, find a regular parent at your school with a law degree. The principal won't refuse to talk to a parent, especially someone who appears neutral and who appears to know what he's talking about.
If the principal still doesn't want to listen to reason, I suppose the student could file an injunction to prevent retaliatory actions against him by the Principal, but that should really be his last resort. These types of misunderstandings usually work themselves out by getting enough parents on your side, without ever needing to go to court.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A principal has all kinds of power over your life as a student. Litigation takes time. And a principal can easily destroy your chances of getting into college or tarnish your record (before litigation can straighten everything out)
So presumably college admissions people don't read the internet and they don't watch the news? Someone who is hiring a journalist will not bother to check out the journalist's online reputation? Really? If a school administrator succeeds in doing what you say, the public overwhelmingly favors the student's position and the buzz on facebook and other social media will be inevitable. Whether you agree or not, your internet profile is an indelible part of your "permanent record" and will be factored into
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't matter what the public reaction is, we're talking about college admissions people whose job involves weeding out students who will be more trouble than they're worth.
Going up against the principal at your high school is almost certainly classified "trouble".
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Insightful)
whose job involves weeding out students who will be more trouble than they're worth.
Students who understand and exercise their civil rights are not "more trouble than they are worth" if the student is pursuing a career in law or journalism.
Re:Force his hand..."Sue me! Sooner than later..." (Score:5, Insightful)
Take the pictures down; repost them all the day that the diploma is received.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but won't appealing to the school board piss the principal off? Sounds like it's lose/lose (and extra loses for each additional option) for the kid here.
Don't Mess With Taxes (Score:2)
.... I mean Texas.
Re:Don't Mess With Taxes (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny. Where I am, public schools (which aren't unionized because public employees aren't allowed to unionize in our state) have better pay for teachers and more resources for the students than private schools, but they also have a higher ratio of impoverished students to rich students and end up scoring consequently less on standardized tests.
Because, in the end, school performance has jack shit to do with teachers or minor funding differences and everything to do with the parents, whether or not they taught the kids to read early and life and whether they continue to expect good academics of the kids. Frankly, it doesn't matter whether you send your kid to private school, a public charter, a talented-and-gifted program inside a normal public school, or what have you, so long as it requires some minor, token effort to get your kid into that school or program instead of the default, lowest-common-denominator stream, where you find the kids whose parents just don't give a damn. Schools are a giant switch block, and any case statement is better than the default.
Re: (Score:2)
All of that is easy to accomplish when you can simply exclude huge swaths of kids.
Re: Don't Mess With Taxes (Score:5, Funny)
The main one being I pay 4000 a year in taxes to send your to school and then spend another $8000 a year each to send of my 4 kids to a better school than the you get for "free".
If you're spending that much to send them to a "better" school, the least they could do in return is proofread your posts for you.
Streisand Effect (Score:5, Insightful)
Dear Principal,
Do you really want to bring this kind of publicity to you and the school you're representing? I'm pretty sure that you won't be able to handle the backlash, and you might actually have to resign or ... get fired.
Unless you have a Board adopted policy, predating the photographs, you're in a really tough position.
Sincerely,
The Internet Community.
Re:Streisand Effect (Score:5, Informative)
Go ahead and let them know:
http://fmhs.lisd.net/apps/staf... [lisd.net]
Lail, Sonya Principal
lailsk@lisd.net 469-713-5192
TO: lailsk@lisd.net (Score:2)
FROM: me
SUBJECT: Really?
I mean, really now?
Re: (Score:3)
Where is the line between having a spirited discussion on how an administrator can lack common sense...and providing their contact details (regardless of how public they may be) to a public forum?
The contact details exist for the express purpose of allowing people to contact them, and you're saying we shouldn't post them because folks might contact them? They can always take them down if they don't want people emailing them.
You're also assuming this is a real personal email account and not a general "bulk mail" contact address that's really handed by someone else.
It's the same in professional sports. (Score:2)
Re:It's the same in professional sports. (Score:5, Informative)
Most professional sports teams copyright their games. Even tweeting the score can get you in trouble. I guess this is no different.
can we count the differences?
professional sports teams play in private settings where access is limited to ticket holders
professional sports teams are paid for their work, they have signed contracts explicitly detailing their rights to their likeness in photographs and other media
high school sports teams play in public settings where anyone is free to view and take pictures
high school athletes are not paid for their work, they have not signed any contractual agreements governing the distribution of their likeness in photographs
if joe sports reporter is free to take pictures for the newspaper
if the parents are free to take photos of their own children
then surely the students are free to take pictures
Re:It's the same in professional sports. (Score:5, Informative)
Incorrect. The game is played on posted grounds. The school charges an admission fee to the game. Many Texas schools have agreements with local TV/Radio Stations for broadcast rights. The public school in Texas that my son attends states right in the school handbook that photos of students taken on school property require a release from the students parent before being published in a public forum.
Re: (Score:2)
we played on a public field, open to the public
even in private school the fields are usually 100% visible from public property (the sidewalk)
if people can watch the football game from public property, there is no expectation of privacy
Re:It's the same in professional sports. (Score:5, Insightful)
Most professional sports teams copyright their games. Even tweeting the score can get you in trouble.
Only if you're a player or party to an agreement that prohibits tweeting the score.
They only own copyright to the media they produce.
Re: (Score:3)
They will kick you out if they spot you with a cam
That doesn't necessarily mean they can enforce the terms on the ticket in any way. Once you have the photo, or the footage, you legally own the footage. They cannot, for example: legally prevent you from posting your photo or reselling your footage, they also cannot force you to delete or destroy anything, they cannot take your camera or damage it or operate its controls, or your film or storage media, or hold you or your equipment hostage, etc, etc.
Any o
in RE: Privacy, not Ownership (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, he clearly owns the copyright on the photographs, so if anyone wants to contest that they are SOL. The privacy concern is legitimate if and only if the pictures were taken in an area where there was an expectation of privacy. A sporting event with people in the stands cheering certainly doesn't seem like a private event...
Re:in RE: Privacy, not Ownership (Score:5, Insightful)
Particularly if they do not post - and enforce - a general prohibition against photography by everyone else, including the press.
Re: (Score:2)
How can you say that when Olympic Committee clearly gives an opposite example?
Re: (Score:2)
because olympic events are privately events held by private entities on private property (leased for the event counts as private property)
everyone who participates in the olympics, athletes, press, etc. signs a contractual agreement that limits their rights
public high school students, have not signed any contractual agreements, are not able to sign any such agreement, and besides, they play on public property and the games are usually quite visible from the public sidewalk around the school, so there is no
Re: (Score:3)
PUBLIC school (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait what? Can a lawyer chime in on this? I don't think it works like that. Just because some group isn't for profit, or is part of the government surely doesn't limit their ability to hold copyright. Now a more important question is did he take the photos during school time? That's typically how it works, if you're on the clock for someone else then they own the copyright. If this was a weekend sporting event and he was just along to watch then the school doesn't have a leg to stand on.
All of this is besid
Re: (Score:2)
That's typically how it works, if you're on the clock for someone else then they own the copyright.
When you are "on the clock" it is because you have a contractual agreement with your employer.
High school students do not have a contractual agreement with the school, and since they are not 18, they are unable to consent to a contractual agreement.
Re: (Score:2)
if the football field can be viewed from public property (the sidewalk next to the school) then there is no expectation of privacy.
Speaking as a former yearbook adviser (Score:5, Insightful)
This guy would be -any- yearbook adviser's dream to have. Look at his photos...they're incredible. He gets in close to his subject, captures the action vividly, and makes very good use of lighting. And for a sophomore? Simply amazing.
This district is handling the situation all wrong. Regardless of whether or not they can or cannot make a claim to the ownership of the photos, they should be lifting this young man up for the talent he has and putting him on a pedestal. Enter him into national photography competitions. Get national recognition for his work, and put the trophies in your trophy case. And make him proud of his talent. He deserves it.
Suing him? Simply ridiculous.
Re: (Score:3)
It makes you wonder if they've had that opinion from their own advisor, and realised they might have to pay the student to be able to use the photos in their yearbook - so they try to bully him into a deal to use the photos for free. Threaten first, to frighten him, then back off with a new deal - "You sign the yearbook publication rights over to us, and we'll forget about the lawsuit"
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Speaking as a former yearbook adviser (Score:5, Insightful)
In one sense (although they will ultimately lose to their own bosses) they have done him a huge favor and his work is now a national discussion and is being seen by someone who will snap this kid up. I wish him the best, he's a great talent.
Re: (Score:3)
This guy would be -any- yearbook adviser's dream to have. Look at his photos...they're incredible. He gets in close to his subject, captures the action vividly, and makes very good use of lighting. And for a sophomore? Simply amazing.
This district is handling the situation all wrong. Regardless of whether or not they can or cannot make a claim to the ownership of the photos, they should be lifting this young man up for the talent he has and putting him on a pedestal. Enter him into national photography competitions. Get national recognition for his work, and put the trophies in your trophy case. And make him proud of his talent. He deserves it.
Suing him? Simply ridiculous.
As a result of the school's actions, the kid is in fact up on a pedestal and getting national attention.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
The school might have a case on privacy grounds (Score:2)
UNLESS...all of the pictures are of school sports events, where there is no expectation of privacy.
This is why I think that intellectual property needs to be recast as an individual right of the actual creator of work, as specified in Art. 1 Section 8. Copyrights and patents should not be any more fungible than your right to free speech is. Shadowy "rights holders" with legal teams have no business owning IP created by others. You want to make money off IP, then maintain a contractual relationship with the
In His Favor (Score:2)
$commentsubject (Score:2)
This reality will only become more evident as time passes, not counting the leaps that new techs cause.
Nice photos, awful school? (Score:2)
Link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/... [flickr.com]
The kid started to sell the pictures to parents, having confirmed with his teacher that he indeed held copyright to the pictures. Apparently the school did not take lightly to him earning money using school equipment and first incorrectly claimed that they owned the
sounds like the NFL (Score:2)
Wrong Principal (Score:3)
The principal doesn't know what he's talking about and needs to study law, or hire a lawyer. The student created the art and is the copyright holder. That is the law. The kid should sue the principal and the school for trying to violate his rights, etc. Opportunity knocks.
Re:Well, this should be interesting... (Score:4, Informative)
Content Rights are like 50% of Slashdot posts...
Re: (Score:3)
Slashdot is about whatever the owners/editors think it's about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't like a story? Don't read it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Please don't post comments to stories that don't interest you.
The sociology of technology is something I must deal with every day. It's interesting to me to read stories about that.
Re:Well, this should be interesting... (Score:5, Funny)
Slashdot isn't about anything except marketing to teenager children any more. This fights right in to their sense of self righteousness.
Yea because when I think "young and hip" slashdot is the first thing that pops into my mind.
Re:Camer was owned by the school (Score:5, Informative)
No. It does not work like that. If you borrow my guitar and write a hit song, it's your song, the copyright is yours. If you borrow my camera and take a Pulitzer-winning photo, it's your photo, the copyright is yours. Copyright goes to the creator of a work, not to the owner of any tools incidental to the creation.
Re:Camer was owned by the school (Score:4, Interesting)
Which is the reason there was recently a story about a photographer that claimed copyright on a photograph that a monkey took of itself using the photographers camera. There was no copyright on the photograph because the one that took the photo isn't eligible for copyright.
Just as in this case, even if the school owns the camera, the paper and all the developing gear the student still owns the copyright. The only possible way the school could even hope to claim copyright would be by declaring that the student was doing work for hire. Needless to say the courts aren't going to look on that line of thought very highly given the lack of paycheck and the compulsory nature of school.
Re: (Score:3)
The school owned the camera he used. Therefore all work from that camera belongs to the school. If he had used is own camera, then they are his to keep.
Just like in the work place, any personal data on company computers used on company time belong to The Company and not you.
the school loaned him the camera. if I rent a camera, do the pictures belong to the rental store?
"just like in the work place" NO, it is NOT just like the work place.
In the work place, the worker has a contractual agreement with their employer that governs the rights of the employee in such matters
High school students are not of the age of consent and thus they are unable to make a contractual agreement, in any case, no such agreement exists.
Re: (Score:2)
"The school owned the camera he used. Therefore all work from that camera belongs to the school. If he had used is own camera, then they are his to keep.
Just like in the work place, any personal data on company computers used on company time belong to The Company and not you."
You're new here, aren't you?
Re:Camer was owned by the school (Score:5, Informative)
The school owned the camera he used. Therefore all work from that camera belongs to the school. If he had used is own camera, then they are his to keep.
Just like in the work place, any personal data on company computers used on company time belong to The Company and not you.
Maybe read the article next time? The school board's policy is that students retain the ownership of works they create even when using school equipment and supplies. Says so right in the article.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The school owned the camera he used. Therefore all work from that camera belongs to the school.
Wrong. The law does not say that, and the conditions the student was allowed to use the camera under did not include an assignment of copyright ownership.
Re:Camer was owned by the school (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope you don't have a job that depends on you giving them advice like this, because if you do your company is probably violating the law all the time based on your "idea" of how the law works, as opposed to reality.
Re: (Score:3)
That school's policy clearly states that copyright is retained by the creator even when using school equipment.
Re: (Score:3)
Untrue? This is from the article: "In addition, the District’s Board Policy Manual explicitly states 'a student shall retain all rights to work created as part of the instruction or using District technology resources.'"
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The threat to report to the IRS is blackmail. Pure and simple. Also as of the article, invalid. As for using school equipment, unless contracts were signed or he was explicitly told not to do it, all that happens is the principal can stop the equipment usage.
Re: (Score:2)
As usual you are only hearing PART of the story. The real story is that this guy was selling the photos. And he was using school provided equipment. And he wasn't paying taxes.
Now you know the REST of the story.
I'd like your source for this. Why does it matter that he wasn't paying taxes? Did he sign a contract saying that he could not use school equipment for private profit? None of the information you've provided* changes the fact that he holds the copyrights.
*"provided" in this case indicating that you have stated it as fact with no supporting evidence.
Re:As usual... (Score:5, Informative)
The real story is that this guy was selling the photos. And he was using school provided equipment. And he wasn't paying taxes.
Selling the photos online isn't a crime. The conditions he was allowed to use the school equipment under allowed him to retain his copyrights, and he didn't sign an agreement promising not to sell photos for money.
Most likely, no taxes are due; he obviously hasn't been running this for years, probably less than 6 months. In order for taxes to be due and unpaid, he would have to be successful in his sales and profit from them, AND have sufficient profit to require filing a return, AND fail to file the required returns for state and federal.
Re:As usual... (Score:4, Informative)
Title 17 of the United States Copyright Law, which denotes that the “Copyright in a work protected under this title vests initially in the author or authors of the work”; in the case of photography, the individual who presses the shutter is the ‘author’.
In addition, the District’s Board Policy Manual explicitly states “a student shall retain all rights to work created as part of the instruction or using District technology resources.”
Re: (Score:2)
I work for a school district in the technology department. We clearly spell out in our usage agreements that everything created on district equipment is for educational purposes only, and not to be sold for profit by either students or staff.
so if a student comes up with the idea of a comic strip while sitting on the school bus, the comic belongs to the school?
Re:School equipment, though (Score:5, Insightful)
I work for a school district in the technology department. We clearly spell out in our usage agreements that everything created on district equipment is for educational purposes only, and not to be sold for profit by either students or staff. Since this guy is using a school camera, I think this might be the policy he's running into.
From his Flickr site: "At the end of the [Texas Association of Journalism Educators] class, I approached the teacher confused, and asked that because I was using a school camera, and using a school press pass, do I still own my pictures? She replied that I did."
If he were using his own equipment on his own time, I'd be first in line to tell the school to blow it out his ear. But if he's covering these sporting events as a member of the yearbook staff for the school and he's turning around and selling yearbook pictures privately for his own profit, then no, I don't think he should do that.
This would require a separate agreement that he (and his parents, since he is a minor and therefore cannot enter into a binding contract) would have had to agree to. He's not an employee of the school (and even then would have to sign an intellectual property agreement first), so the press pass means squat. School board policy even states that students retain ownership of their creative works. As for the camera ownership doesn't matter by itself in the eyes of copyright law (see the monkey selfie fiasco).
Re:School equipment, though (Score:5, Insightful)
I work for a school district in the technology department. We clearly spell out in our usage agreements that everything created on district equipment is for educational purposes only, and not to be sold for profit by either students or staff. Since this guy is using a school camera, I think this might be the policy he's running into.
Perhaps, if it was written down and his parents signed it or there was some valid way for all parties to agree with the rule.
From his Flickr site: "At the end of the [Texas Association of Journalism Educators] class, I approached the teacher confused, and asked that because I was using a school camera, and using a school press pass, do I still own my pictures? She replied that I did."
If he were using his own equipment on his own time, I'd be first in line to tell the school to blow it out his ear. But if he's covering these sporting events as a member of the yearbook staff for the school and he's turning around and selling yearbook pictures privately for his own profit, then no, I don't think he should do that.
Being on the yearbook staff does not preclude him from doing things on his own. It isn't a contractually bound obligation. Unless the press pass bound him contractually (which would be odd for a high school), it's just and ID to let you into places where the public is restricted.
In any event, the principal (at least according to TFA) is being an ass. Instead of sitting him down and discussing this rather complex real world issue, he / she (?) threatens with blackmail and suspensions. Not exactly role model material here.
Re: (Score:3)
They're claiming copyright over the rights of the venue.
Even still the photographer would have "fair use" rights to publish photographs that illustrate the football games. The posting of photographs of game action is "news reporting" and thus "fair use" would allow the photographer to publish the pictures.