The National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) has issued a strong warning to photojournalists regarding a growing trend of restrictive credential agreements. These agreements increasingly require photographers to surrender significant rights to their work simply for the privilege of covering an event, a practice the NPPA calls a 'rights grab'.
A recent dispute with The Gazelle Group, a major sports event organizer, has brought this issue to the forefront. The company's initial credentialing terms demanded an irrevocable, free license for photographers' images, sparking a unified pushback from professional organizations and major news agencies.
Key Takeaways
- The NPPA is warning photographers about 'rights grab' credential agreements that demand free use of their images.
- A recent case involves The Gazelle Group, which asked for an irrevocable, cost-free license to all photos taken at its events.
- Major photo agencies like the Associated Press and Getty Images have joined the NPPA in opposing these terms.
- The NPPA argues that trading credentials for photos is coercive, hostile to journalists, and may violate First Amendment rights.
A Contentious Exchange for Access
The controversy began when The Gazelle Group, which organizes numerous college basketball events, included a specific clause in its credential application. The clause stated that in exchange for credentials, photographers must grant the company an "irrevocable license, at no cost, to use any and all photos taken at the Event for any purpose whatsoever (other than resale)."
This demand immediately drew criticism from the NPPA, the New York Press Photographers Association (NYPPA), and other industry bodies. Such terms effectively force photographers to 'pay' for access with their own intellectual property.
Mickey H. Osterreicher, General Counsel for the NPPA, described this type of arrangement as a nonstarter for professional news organizations. Major players like Getty Images, the Associated Press, Imagn, and Icon Sports Wire were all involved in discussions opposing the terms, highlighting the widespread industry concern.
The Initial Standoff
The original agreement required photographers to provide The Gazelle Group with digital access to their entire collection of photos from the event. This wasn't a request for a few promotional shots but a broad license to use a photographer's full body of work from that assignment without any compensation.
This practice is viewed by many as not only unfair but also a threat to the financial viability of photojournalism. Photographers and the agencies they work for rely on licensing images to generate revenue. Giving away those rights for free undermines their entire business model.
What is a 'Rights Grab'?
In the context of photography and journalism, a 'rights grab' refers to a situation where an event organizer, client, or platform requires creators to sign over extensive rights to their work as a condition of participation, employment, or access. This often includes demands for royalty-free, perpetual, or irrevocable licenses, allowing the organizer to use the work for commercial purposes without further payment to the creator.
The Push for Fairer Terms
In response to the outcry, the NPPA engaged directly with The Gazelle Group. On October 14, the association sent a draft with proposed alternative language. The core of the NPPA's proposal was to re-establish standard industry practices.
The key points of the NPPA's proposed changes were:
- Retention of Rights: Credentialed photographers or their employers would retain all rights to their images.
- Optional Licensing: The Gazelle Group could request a separate, non-exclusive license for specific images.
- Defined Usage: Any licensed use would be for clearly defined purposes, such as marketing, website, or social media.
- Negotiated Terms: Any additional licensing agreements would be handled separately between the photographer (or their agency) and The Gazelle Group.
A week later, The Gazelle Group revised its terms. However, the new agreement still required photographers to provide up to three selected images per event under a non-exclusive license in exchange for credentials. While the company offered to provide a photo credit, the fundamental issue of trading access for content remained.
A Broader Industry Problem
This is not an isolated incident. The NPPA has previously challenged similar 'rights grab' credential agreements from major musical performers, including Taylor Swift, Beyoncé, and Ariana Grande. These cases highlight a persistent effort by event organizers to leverage access in order to acquire valuable media content for free.
Why the Compromise Was Rejected
On October 23, after consulting with the involved media groups, Mr. Osterreicher informed The Gazelle Group that their revised offer was still unacceptable. He stated that "trading credentials for up to three photos remained a significant problem."
The NPPA countered with another revision. This version suggested that photographers could, at their discretion, send a selection of images to The Gazelle Group. The company could then license these images at "competitive, reasonable market rates." This would restore the standard commercial relationship between a content creator and a business seeking to use that content.
"Demands for the absolute right to profit off our members’ work are even more egregious when coupled with editorial control. Such demands are patently offensive and incompatible with a free press."
The NPPA's statement powerfully concludes its argument against these coercive practices.
The Legal and Ethical Implications
The NPPA argues that the issue extends beyond unfair business practices. Mr. Osterreicher explained that The Gazelle Group's demands are "strongly objectionable and hostile toward photographers." He also suggested they could be illegal.
The argument rests on constitutional rights. Photojournalists, as members of the press, have a right to cover newsworthy events. By creating non-negotiable terms that force journalists to surrender their rights, organizations like The Gazelle Group are effectively gatekeeping access to news.
This practice, the NPPA contends, runs afoul of the First Amendment. It creates a barrier that prevents journalists from doing their jobs unless they agree to commercially unviable and ethically questionable terms. The association emphasizes that when photographers' rights are protected, it ultimately protects the public's right to information and visual truth.
A Call for Vigilance
The outcome of the negotiations with The Gazelle Group remains uncertain. However, the NPPA and its partners have made their position clear. They are using this incident as a case study to warn all journalists and news outlets to read credentialing forms with extreme care.
The association's final message is a call to action for the industry: "Photographers and news organizations should not acquiesce to these coercive agreements. Protecting your rights protects the public’s right to see the truth."
Photographers who encounter similar issues or have concerns about credentialing agreements are encouraged to contact the NPPA directly for legal guidance and support.