While photographers, industry organisations, and photo agents have slammed Time Inc’s latest photo contract and are pushing to negotiate better conditions for photographers, the publishing giant is effectively saying ‘take it or leave it’.
The contract, which Time is demanding photographers sign up to by January 1, 2016, has a number of clauses photographers aren’t thrilled about.
A handful of affiliated brands/magazines owned by Time.
‘Space rates’ which previously gave a photographer compensation of US$125 each time a photo re-appears in print has been removed; Time Inc grants itself free re-usage of assignment photos in affiliated brands and books; cover shots will be exclusively owned by Time Inc. and cannot be sold elsewhere; and fees for republished photos from outside an assignment have been reduced. All these clauses subtract potential revenue streams available within previous contracts.
John Harrington, photographer and blogger, was quick to note that the new ‘up to US$650 day rate’ isn’t nearly as profitable as the US$350 a photographer was paid in the 1980s after inflation is considered.
However the ‘up to US$650’ is a raise from the previous figure of US$500 provided the photographer is paid the maximum amount, but things taste a little more bitter when there’s no opportunity to resell or make a secondary use of the photos.
‘This is the worst (contract) I’ve seen, and I’ve seen hundreds… It’s not close to being equitable,’ a Time photographer told US professional photography website Photoshelter. ‘I bring $75,000 of equipment out to a shoot. $650 is not even remotely close to cutting it (without secondary use).’
Brooks Kraft, another long-time contributor to Time also said that the $650 day rate would be fine for routine assignments but it wouldn’t cut it for larger in-depth stories with many images featured.
‘If Time Magazine publishes double page spreads from an important story, the photographer should make more than $650.’
The (US) National Press Photographers Association and the American Society of Media Photographers penned an open letter to Norm Pearlstine, executive vice president and chief content office of Time Inc, objecting the ‘draconian terms and conditions’ solely used to increase profits.
‘A number of photographers have expressed outrage regarding the new terms that negate their capacity to earn fair syndication and licensing fees without any meaningful increase in the “Assignment Photo Day Rate,” which sets maximum payments that are below those paid 35 years ago when adjusted for inflation,’ it says. ‘By cleverly using the words “up to” you have created a contract of adhesion granting a long list of comprehensive rights to your company.’
(‘Contract of Adhesion definition: A type of contract, a legally binding agreement between two parties to do a certain thing, in which one side has all the bargaining power and uses it to write the contract primarily to his or her advantage.)
The letter concludes by saying that even though some photographers have likely signed off on the contract, this is an opportunity ‘to elevate your company to the days when photographers felt proud and privileged to contribute to such an esteemed organisation’.
ProCounter asked Time Inc’s PR department a week ago whether the contract applies to Australian photographers but did not receive a response in… time. (‘Austria! Do we even have photographers in Austria?’)
And on the home front, Richard Weinstein, president of the Australian Commercial and Media Photographers, said the board is currently deciding how to advise photographers regarding contracts.
‘We are currently in discussion with our board and are speaking with external consultants for advice to how we would best propose guidelines for photographers working in different genre to negotiate usage and licence agreements.’
He didn’t provide an estimated time of arrival for when those guidelines might see the light of day. He suggests photographers read the Better Business Bible, which is available to AIPP/ACMP members on the AIPP website.
Following the widespread criticism Time Inc responded with the statement: ‘We have standardized our photography rights and rates across our brands. Our new contract is fair and equitable. Many photographers have already signed the new agreement.’
Click here to read the Time Inc Photographer Contract.
Had any unpleasant surprises with local editorial photography contracts lately? Feel free to share any war stories with fellow professionals. Knowledge is power!