Douglas, and anyone else for that matter:)

Kelly Irvin
Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:06:17 PST
Dear Joakim:

I sell a number of flower bulbs for which I don't have a photo to 
represent. As a retailer, the old saying, "A picture is worth a thousand 
words," really means something. I would so desperately like to have a 
picture for every product, because I believe it adds significant impact 
to how well the product will sell. This may not have been the case 
decades ago, but so many of the well established bulb dealers DO have 
pictures, and, I believe, customers are accustomed to deciding on a 
product based on being able to see a picture.

I've been photographing  like a madman the past  year and a quarter, so 
people can SEE what I am selling. I have had limited success finding 
affordable sources of images, but have found one or two. It's still 

For a company to take indiscriminately, without permission, other 
peoples' images to promote their products is doing three "naughty" 
things. They are using someone else's vested resource without permission 
and taking 100% of the profit that the addition of that resource 
provided to their income. Two, they are NOT investing their own money or 
efforts (legal) into the acquisition of those resources. Three, they are 
adding additional credibility to their product from a source that has 
not acknowledged their product to be credible.

IBS & PBS are non-profit, but that does not mean they don't need money 
to survive. When a for-profit company takes these images without 
permission they take a legitimate resource away from a non-profit org. 
If IBS or PBS is the original and only source for a particular species 
ID via image, this attracts viewers, potentially attracting members, 
potentially promoting the survival (and hoped non-profit prosperity) of 
the organization. Get a few image pirates out there, then, when someone 
wants to do a web search for a particular species image, IBS or PBS is 
no longer the only reference. The customer now chooses their link. This 
would be all fine and dandy if the other images were unique (choice is 
good), or if the org had made some sort of arrangement with the user, 
because the org has had a chance to decided how they might benefit from 
whatever trade is made, but what happens here is the pirate takes all 
the benefit.

Of course, it gets even more complicated when the images actually 
originate with groups of people. These people want to share their images 
with other members and even the world, but they have chosen to share 
them, in agreement with the associated organization, from a particular 
source, I would presume besides the aforementioned, to help that 
organization attract new members. If a business inquires with the org, 
which then inquires with the individual (assuming the org has not 
garnered by agreement all rights to the image), and the individual 
agrees under whatever terms, then great. Otherwise, the org and 
individual have be robbed, even if only in the right of giving permission.

Joakim Erson wrote:

>My mother always told me to ask when I don´t understand something, and I do
>not understand this.
I may have missed it, but I don't believe Douglas made an aggression 
toward IBS here.

>The case as I understand it ( and I havent read alot about it, so please
>correct me if Im wrong) is that someone has submitted your (
>Douglas´s)pictures ( under fake name?) to IBS gallery?if so,  isnt your
>aggression towards IBS mis-placed?

Mr. Kelly M. Irvin
The Bulbmeister
4407 Town Vu Road
Bentonville, AR 72712

USDA Cold Hardiness Zone 6b


More information about the pbs mailing list