National Parks photo contest

According to the rules pictures you submit become the property of The Globe. (That means they are no longer yours to submit to other contests, sell, etc.)

"By submitting your photo to Boston.com, you agree that such photo and the accompanying information will become the property of Boston.com and you grant Boston.com, The Boston Globe"

I don't mind sharing my photos, but I don't want to give up ownership. More reasonable would be for if the terms granted The Globe and licensees a perpetual license to use.

I agree, Larry --- that language on other photo contests on the site does not accurately reflect Boston.com's intention, and I am trying to get the language I crafted for RAW's contests adopted universally across the site:

"By submitting your photo(s) to Boston.com, you grant Boston.com and The Boston Globe permission to publicly display, reproduce, and use the photographs in any form or media for any and all editorial and related promotional purposes in perpetuity. However, you will retain the copyright to your photo(s) and Boston.com and The Boston Globe will not sell your photo(s)."

We would never sell user photos that had been submitted for a contest or a photo gallery without first asking the photographer and then coming to an agreement about payment. The language in our contest rules should reflect that intention.

Any chance on getting the rules changed prior to the deadline for this contest? I have a photo I would like to submit. While I understand the intentions, I feel I have to go by what's officially published.

I think that these contests shouldn't have any age restrictions. I don't think that the age of the photographer matters as much as the quality of the picture.

I'm looking into the age restriction on this contest, Meg. We don't have any age restrictions on the monthly contests on RAW, and I believe that our photo contest rules should be uniform across the site. I'll get back to everybody when I find out more.

I'm with Larry . . . I'm not giving up the rights to my photo but would certainly allow it to be used. Until that change is made in writing, I won't be entering.

Many such rules seem to ignore the photographers' intents and interests when entering these contests, either intentionally or just out of inconsideration. The photographers want to share their work, to gain exposure and PR, and to support an organization. They would have one or more of the above in mind (I left out wanting to win on purpose). Serious photographers with knowledge and self esteem would also want their best work (which they typically submit to contests) to be treated with respect and their copyrights protected.

I don't mean to single out Globe.com for their rules. In another post, I referred to another site's forum thread which listed many other offenders. These are great organizations with worthy causes that photographers would have loved to support if not for their ridiculous and inconsiderate rules.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=36847

Under your revised rules, I don't see how "you will retain the copyright to your photo(s)" has any meaning. While you are not selling these photos, Globe's use of them does serve a purpose, with or without resulting in explicit profit. On the other hand, the photographers gain NOTHING from it. Letting others use our work without benefiting us IS GIVING UP OUR COPYRIGHTS.

There remain no mention that credits would be given when a photo is used. Nor is there any mention that a photographer will be notified where and when a photo is used. When you cannot even offer these simple support to the photographers, I don't consider your rules revision sincere or considerate.

Would Ken Burns allow his work to be treated the same way?