PLUS – Completing the Circle

It was great to learn last week that The American Association of Advertising Agencies (AAAA) has not only joined the PLUS Coalition, but has assigned their V.P. Harold S. Geller (LinkedIn: Profile) to take a seat on the PLUS Coalition’s Board of Directors. Good to see AAAA stepping up to the plate on behalf of its members. The PLUS Board includes 13 seats – one seat (and one vote) for each industry that creates, distributes, uses or preserves images. Only non-profit organizations can hold a PLUS Board seat, and all Board members are unpaid volunteers. PLUS clearly did it right, setting up an industry-neutral board from the beginning.

AAAA has also indicated that they will be incorporating the PLUS standards into Ad-ID, the digital asset management system used by the world’s largest corporations to manage tv commercials, images and other content. Ad-ID is jointly owned and operated by AAAA and the Association of National Advertisers (ANA), one of the most powerful trade associations in our business or any other.

(Continued after the Jump)

When I participated in the PLUS standards building process several years ago, I did so along-side 2000 other volunteers, including dozens of art buyers from ad agencies of all sizes, many from the major-league ad agencies. I quickly found that photographers’ clients are every bit as enthusiastic about PLUS as photographers. Why? PLUS was and is the only example of clients and photographers joining forces on a global scale to improve our industries for the benefit of all concerned.

I have to admit that at first, I had doubts that the photography organizations could set aside their differences and cooperate effectively on a major initiative. Fortunately, they could. Every major photographers’ association in USA and many abroad are members of the PLUS Coalition. I also wasn't sure that clients and stock agencies would join in and collaborate with photographers on a level playing field, to build industry standards. Yet, they did. The publishers, designers and ad agencies are well represented within PLUS, as are the stock agencies (PACA, CEPIC, Getty, Corbis, Masterfile, Alamy, etc). And of course, I had no hope that the museums and libraries would join in. After all, they are among the most vocal proponents of the orphan works legislation, fair use, and sharing of works. Not only are the museums and libraries (J Paul Getty Trust, New York Metropolitan Museum, Boston MFA, etc) participating in PLUS, but even organizations like Creative Commons are collaborating with the Coalition.

I now understand why. There is no downside to PLUS, for any industry or profession. PLUS standards can be applied to an image licensing model and are designed to remain relevant in a continually evolving marketplace. PLUS is about clear communication, and clear communication benefits everyone. Except perhaps the lawyers. By describing rights using words and definitions approved by all industries, and by using IDs that uniquely identify every rights holder, every image, and every license, we can avoid misunderstandings with our clients and help them and everyone else to make informed decisions about using our images.

PLUS has made remarkable progress. In just a few years, they have pulled together an incredibly diverse group of stakeholders, successfully developed our industry’s first business standards, and are now working on integrating those standards into common applications that we already use in our workflow. This is the key. Adobe has been a major supporter of PLUS from the start, and I am looking forward to seeing Adobe integrate PLUS across the board in all of their applications. Tim Armes built a very nice PLUS for Lightroom plugin, but I’d like to see Lightroom fully integrate PLUS. The DAM software companies are now working with PLUS, because the major publishers have all announced that they will require photographers, stock agencies and all other vendors to use the PLUS standards. Hindsight has build PLUS into their licensing workflow. Apple has got to wake up and build PLUS metadata into Aperture. Some other companys just seem to be asleep at the wheel, lagging behind on adoption of the standards. Everyone benefits from the PLUS standards, yet some seem to think that by ignoring the PLUS successes and in-roads, they will somehow not occur. That's like turning your back on a tidal wave and pronouncing "wave? what wave?" simply because you can't see it cresting over your head.

Kudos to ASMP, APA and NPPA for their recent contributions of Authors Coalition royalty funding to PLUS, which is the perfect initiative to make use of those funds. Kudos also to AAAA for taking a leadership role in the PLUS Coalition and completing the circle.

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

PLUS, No Minuses

PLUS - the Picture Licensing Universal System, has been busy, of late, they just haven't been tooting their horn. Despite Paul Melcher's perspective on "Plus or Minus?", suggesting they've been quiet, they've been busy. Unlike spotlight seekers, who tout the arrival of a 1.0.1 to a 1.0.2 release like it's the second coming, PLUS continues to move forward with little fanfare or spotlight seeking. Melcher is a bright guy, so perhaps his focus has been elsewhere and not had PLUS on his radar, so here's a review and different perspective for everyone's benefit.

Almost a year ago, PLUS quietly achieved a major milestone, getting the three major publishers - McGraw Hill, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, and Pearson to announce "they will adopt the PLUS Picture Licensing Glossary definitions in their contracts, and that they encourage image suppliers to begin embedding PLUS license metadata in all images within one year." At that time, Maria Kessler, President of the Picture Archive Association of America said, “We are very pleased that these major publishers – the largest image licensees in the industry – are aligned in their support of the PLUS standards.” While this may not have been on Melcher's radar 11 months ago, getting his new agency, Picture Group, to have PLUS-compliant licensing should be priority #1 if he hopes to license images to these publishers given their adoption schedules.

(Continued after the Jump)

In March of this year, IPNstock committed to integrate PLUS licensing standards, and with Getty and Corbis having been substantial supporters of PLUS over the years, you can bet that they are focused on meeting the needs of their major clients - the publishers above - as they work to integrate PLUS compliant licensing in time to effectively service those clients. In the coming years, look to see PLUS compliant drop-down menus in licensing modules at major stock agencies.

In June, Jim Cooks' Hindsight Software became the first software solution for photographers to create PLUS licensing with drop-down menus and metadata that was both cut-and-paste as well as exportable.

In July, the Professional School Photographers Association (PSPA) joined PLUS, "ensuring that school photographers and their customers will benefit from simplified communication of rights information and automated recognition of image licenses by photofinishing services, photofinishing machines and consumer photo printers." This will make it easier for people to know what they can and can't do with their school portraits when they're thinking about going to Wal-Mart to copy the 2x4 proof with the big "PROOF" stamped across it, as if it wasn't obvious enough already.

My book, Best Business Practices for Photographers, Second Edition, uses heavily PLUS examples in the new chapter 26 of the book "Licensing Your Work", demonstrating how I have been using PLUS licensing for years, and which has been received with no objection by my clients over the years.

Melcher expresses concern that PLUS might feel beholden to ASMP because they have donated $85,000 and just announced a $150,000 contribution to PLUS. This is a small fraction of the monies PLUS has received from founders Getty, Corbis, Microsoft, and others, and further, PLUS has a 13 member board, only one of which is occupied by a photographers trade organization. Currently, that seat is occupied by ASMP, but it rotates to others over time.

Melcher also expresses concern about the PLUS-PicScout deal recently announced because it is an exclusive one. Right now, no other image tracking service is as big as PicScout in terms of images fingerprinted, and the integration between PLUS and PicScout requires a relationship exist for technology sharing and commitments of time and resources to make this happen. Further, just as Dell opted to go with Microsoft as the default operating system because it was needed to make the machines run, so too did PLUS need "someone" to do the fingerprinting, and PicScout apparently had the best to offer. Further, the exclusivity deal is not a "forever" deal just as Dell now sells other operating systems pre-installed, however the current deal certainly creates an atmosphere where PicScout can be candid with PLUS about capabilities to make this work - especially while PicScout is on the forefront of image recognition services.

What is not clear is how a PicScout image registry would compete with the PLUS image registry that is being funded by ASMP and APA, in part. What is clear though, is that there is no "mysterious agenda" on the part of PLUS. Melcher points to PLUS working with Creative Commons as one of their "strange relationships". Creative Commons, as much as I am not a fan of it, is popular among image users, and in order for PLUS to remain neutral in the advocacy arena when it comes to promoting photographers rights and income preservation, they must facilitate also what the end users of images need as well. PLUS makes things more clear and more concise when it comes to licensing, whether or not it is a $1M exclusive license of a celebrity photo from Picture Group, or a "for attribution" Creative Commons free license. In both cases, a PLUS license is the best way to make sure everyone is on the same page.

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

Detailing Understandable Rights Packages - Editorial Covers

Consider this - You're called to shoot a magazine cover. Your marketing paid off, and you have fees and expenses that fit the clients' budget, and are fair to you.

How do you define your rights package so you and the client understand it. Simple. Speak the same language. Use PLUS. (Check it out - it's free for you as a photographer to use!)

Here are a few ways you could define your contract:

In their "PLUS Packs" category, they have a package of rights for the cover. It is:

Periodical Cover - One Issue (PPCO)
Use on the cover of a magazine, newspaper or journal. Applies to a single printed issue of a periodical. Includes distribution of same issue on publisher's website. Allows reproduction of cover for promotional purposes.

You define the following:

Duration, PLUS Region, Region Constraints, End User, Product or Service Name, License Start Date

So, your license might read:

Produce one portrait of {subject} on September 1, 2007, for ZYQ Magazine cover. Rights granted are: Periodical Cover - One Issue (PLUS PACK:PPCO), beginning October 1, 2007 in the United States, for ZYQ Magazine.

(Continued after the Jump)

In addition to that information being on the front of your contract, under a field like "Description of Assignment and Rights Licensed", you would want to include that text into the metadata of the image you are sending them. While future metadata templates and fields will make this process easier, for now, It could well look like this (click to see larger):


Here's a screen grab of my contract for an assignment I shot last week:


In the rare case that your publication is akin to People, and People En Espagnol, your license should then include a language specification, and could then read:

Produce one portrait of {subject} on September 1, 2007, for ZYQ Magazine cover. Rights granted are: Periodical Cover - One Issue (PLUS PACK:PPCO), beginning October 1, 2007 in the United States, English language only, for ZYQ Magazine.

Suppose though, that you're assignment is for the inside of the magazine? PLUS PACK PPIO works for you:

Periodical Interior - One Issue (PPIO)

Use on an interior page of a magazine, newspaper or journal. Applies to a single printed issue of a periodical. Includes distribution of same issue on publisher's website. Allows reproduction of page for promotional purposes.

You define the following:

Duration, PLUS Region, Region Constraints, End User, Product or Service Name, License Start Date

So, your license could then read:

Produce one portrait of {subject} on September 1, 2007, for ZYQ Magazine interior story. Rights granted are: Periodical Interior - One Issue (PLUS PACK:PPIO), beginning October 1, 2007 in the United States, for ZYQ Magazine.

What if you're client's not familiar with the PLUS glossary? You could include the cross-industry accepted definition as well:

Produce one portrait of {subject} on September 1, 2007, for ZYQ Magazine cover. Rights granted are: Periodical Cover - One Issue (PLUS PACK:PPCO), beginning October 1, 2007 in the United States, for ZYQ Magazine. PLUS Pack PPCO is defined as: "Use on the cover of a magazine, newspaper or journal. Applies to a single printed issue of a periodical. Includes distribution of same issue on publisher's website. Allows reproduction of cover for promotional purposes." For more information, visit USPLUS.com.

This additional information, whether this license, or the one below, could make it more undertandable.

Suppose though, that your client is insisting that reprint rights (i.e. being able to reprint the cover story to sell to the subject of the story for their own promotional purposes) be included? After you've determined the additional fee that should apply to this extension of the rights being granted, then try then "PLUS (Rights Ready) Packs". There, you'll find:

Editorial Front Cover (PREC)
Use on the front cover of a magazine, newspaper, book or other printed material not intended for commercial or promotional purposes. Use applies to a single issue or edition and all reprints or printed versions of the original use. Image may only be used on the front cover of the publication.

you then define:

Duration, PLUS Region, Region Constraints, End User, Product or Service Name, License Start Date

So, your assignment description on your contract would read:

Produce one portrait of {subject} on September 1, 2007, for ZYQ Magazine cover. Rights granted are: Editorial Front Cover (PLUS PACK:PREC), beginning October 1, 2007 in the United States, for ZYQ Magazine.

Or, if the definition needed to be included as we did above:

Produce one portrait of {subject} on September 1, 2007, for ZYQ Magazine cover. Rights granted are: Editorial Front Cover (PLUS PACK:PREC), beginning October 1, 2007 in the United States, for ZYQ Magazine. PLUS Pack PREC is defined as: "Use on the front cover of a magazine, newspaper, book or other printed material not intended for commercial or promotional purposes. Use applies to a single issue or edition and all reprints or printed versions of the original use. Image may only be used on the front cover of the publication." For more information, visit USPLUS.com.

Here's how it looked for an assignment from two months ago for a smaller circulation trade publication:


By being specific about your rights packages, it makes it so much clearer for everyone to understand, and fewer clients will be demanding "all rights" deals, when you've given them what they need, and they pay for those needs.

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]