Author: Leslie Burns

On Friday the 13th, the California State Bar released the pass list for the February Bar Exam. I was on it. After years of wanting to go to law school, finally getting the chance (and a scholarship!), reading around 4000 pages a term, and sitting through three days of intellectual hell (the actual exam), I am a lawyer.

Well, almost. I have to pay my Bar fees and take the oath. 🙂

Thanks to all of you who gave me so much support through the years. Every kind email/FB post/tweet really helped.

I’m going to give away three, count ’em three, copies of the BAP2Go app (each a $59.99 value!), but you’ve got to earn it… sort of. Here’s the deal:

1) Post something about the app on your blog or Twitter or Facebook or some other medium that reaches other photographers. For example, you could post that you are posting in the hopes of winning a copy of the app. Or, you could post that you think the app will help your biz. Or you could post that the app exists.

2) Include a link to the app. You can copy/paste this short form, if it helps: http://tinyurl.com/bap2go

3) Send me a link to the post, or tag me on the tweet (@LeslieBAP), or somehow let me know about the post/tweet/fb/whatever (screenshots ok). This last step is important because it’s how I will know to put your name in the hat.

You can do 1-3 as many times as you want, and each separate one will be its own entry into the drawing.

Do all that before May 20th, 5pm PT, and I will take all the names of those who completed the steps and put them in a hat and draw out the winners. Make sure I have your email addy to be able to contact you if you are a winner–to send you a code.

Yes, this is a shameless request to get publicity about the app out there. Duh! I’d like the app to be successful, of course, and the best way for that to happen is for the news of the app to get out to as wide a photo audience as possible.

Thanks for the help and GOOD LUCK!

Available today, the new Burns Auto Parts Consultants to Go (BAP2Go) app provides buyers with vital business information. It’s like having my brain, in your pocket, but without the squishy mess.

Seriously, though, what the app does is give you instant access to Manuals, other writings, my Twitter feed, and Creative Lube podcasts and will, soon, also have videos, information about upcoming speaking events, and (when I pass the Bar), legal information too. All the content is at no additional charge after purchasing the app and it is constantly push-updated. In other words, you pay once and, in a month, you’ll have more than you paid for. In 6 months, even more. It’s kind of like an ever-expanding photo business multi-media encyclopedia, all in one place and for one flat fee.

Currently it’s only Apple-product friendly, but an Android version is in the works.

Terence Hart is brilliant. If you don’t follow his blog copyhype.com, you should. His most recent post serves as a wonderful reminder of why copyright is important not just to the individual “author” but to society as a whole. I am particularly struck by the A. Kaminstein quote about half-way down. In part, it reads:

[…] ironically, in seeking to make the author’s works widely available by freeing them from copyright restrictions, they fail to realize that they are whittling away the very thing that nurtures authorship in the first place.

You are an artist, the maker of culture and society. Copyright is the tool that makes that possible.

Piracy affects real people and this PSA helps to demonstrate that.

Have you paid for every song on your iTunes? Every video? How about all of your software? Unless the item was released by its IP owner for free reproduction/distribution, I mean, of course.

Do you have videos you’ve made which have a soundtrack from your music library? Did you buy the license for that use?

Do you have a $500 “designer” item that you bought for $25?

How about your spouse/partner? And your kids? Do they have illegal downloads on their machines?

I’m betting that many of you have stuff you got by less-than-legal means or use IP in ways for which you do not have the rights. And your kids, almost assuredly so.

We cannot take the moral high ground when we ourselves are infringing on the IP rights of others or permit our families to do so. We must lead by example as much as we preach respecting copyright (and other IP protections). Using excuses like “well, it was just this once” or “I can’t afford the software” or “someone sent it to me” won’t cut it. We must be clean ourselves.

Years ago, I had illegal software. I got rid of it and told my family (who had given me most of it) that it was wrong. I still fight with my brothers about ripping and sharing. It’s not fun, but I know it’s the right thing to do.  I know I’m not hurting other creatives and/or other businesses (yes, even the big ones) who invest time, money, and effort into making these products.

I know that I’m no longer a part of the problem.

How about you? Are you an IP hypocrite like I was? You can change that today, and I hope you will. Take the time to teach those closest to you, too. And please, make sure that it’s clear that in your house, IP piracy/theft/counterfeiting in any form is not permitted.

In the creative industries, as in most businesses really, clients can be…um…challenging. Thank heavens for sites like clientcopia.com. Some examples of brilliant client quotes/stories:

It also helps us keep things in perspective. When a client jerks you around, don’t take it personally. Don’t even take it professionally, so to speak–I mean, it’s not just photographers who get asked stupid questions, etc. Just laugh, and share it with others, anonymously of course.

Going to law school was an eye-opening experience. I learned tons. Of course I learned things like the parol evidence rule (and its correct spelling… no “e”) for contracts and the difference between Past Recollection Recorded and Present Recollection Refreshed (evidence rules). But I learned so much more that applies to everything in my life and business.

Most of all, I learned how much I didn’t know about the law before. And that, my friends, is saying a lot.

For years I had been spouting off about copyright and licensing and I was considered an expert in our industry. That was accurate–I was one and what I knew I was pretty much right about. But although it seemed like tons of info, in fact, I was only scratching the surface of those topics. I know so much more now than I did before law school, when I thought I knew a ton. Moreover, I now know that there is still a ton more to learn.

This is where we get ourselves into trouble. Because photographers and other creatives intersect with the law often in the business, we think we know more than we actually do and we speak when we should defer to real experts. The law isn’t the only area where this happens, but it is the one I know best about now and so will speak to it. Someone will post a legal question on a forum, for example, and very well-meaning colleagues will answer. Others will add their 2¢. But really, even the most articulate responses can be full of legal misrepresentations.

Besides, legal advice via committee is about as good as design by committee, and we all know how good that is.

Of course, the trouble is too many photographers think they know enough about design to design their own promos, too. But that is a different story for another post.

Anyway, back to my point, in the law, language we all use every day can have radically different meanings. Words like “presumption,” “notice,” “constructive,” and “consideration” (just to name a few) each takes on a completely different sense. Let’s look at that last one, consideration. The legal dictionary definition is “a bargained-for legal detriment.” What the heck is that? Well, courts have interpreted that to mean as little as a promise, in the right context, or sometimes much more. Consideration does not have to be of equal value in a contract, but both sides must provide consideration for the contract to be valid. Where the lines are drawn? Well, a lawyer will have read many, many cases which lay the foundation for how a court is likely to interpret the meaning of the word generally and, in your case, will research your specific details to find the best, most accurate & likely result for you. But post a question about consideration on a forum and a lay person will likely say something like “you have to pay the models something–at least give ’em a print” which sounds dangerously like a helpful answer, but may not be of any help to you at all or could even hurt you.

As was said recently in the fabulous Fuck you. Pay Me. video, you can’t be a professional if you don’t hire professionals. Lawyers, CPAs, great insurance brokers, and even designers will save/make you more money than they cost. Don’t rely on the online committee to get the help you need to be successful.

Here’s the thing: no one, no matter how much experience s/he has, can give you good advice on a legal issue except a licensed lawyer. Not even me, yet. You’d never take a prescription written by a bunch of photographers, would you? (I hope not!) Well, this stuff is just as important and specialized. Sure, we all can suggest taking an advil for a headache, but we’ll not know to ask about some other subtle symptom that makes all the difference between a headache and a stroke warning. Same goes for the law. Same goes for accounting/taxes too. There is a reason the hurdles to these professions are high–there is so much to know.

And sometimes that includes knowing what you don’t know.

Yesterday, news broke of the rejection of the Google Books class action settlement. The opinion reads like a parental spanking of Google, and I am all the more happy for it. The basic point of the rejection? Google would get property rights which weren’t even part of the original claim(s) and which are the exclusive right of the IP owners to grant. In other words, it can’t be an Opt-Out system but might be able to be an Opt-In one. That makes sense. And the judge mentioned that, really, some of the issues in the case need to be decided through legislation, not the courts and certainly not through private, self-interested entities. Huzzah.

Bravo to all those who opposed the Books settlement, who wrote the court, and who fought for their rights. The judge in the actual opinion cited several of these “regular” people who asked for their rights to be preserved. Those folk, those regular people helped stop the anti-copright tide. We owe them all our gratitude.

This isn’t done yet, but it’s a good sign. I get the feeling that things are at least judicially swinging back in the pro-protection direction. Maybe even societally too.

One thing that lots of people haven’t understood is that Google was never interested in doing all this work (scanning, indexing, etc.) without knowing that in the end they would make money from it… and lots of it. The company is not some benevolent demi-deity who reaches out to benefit humanity. No, it’s a business, and a damn big one. It has a Board of Directors and stockholders to answer to. It’s a smart business, no question, but it is in business to do one thing and one thing only: make money. That’s not a bad thing–I’m not down on Google for that–but too many people seem to think making money is in second position to some other lofty goal for that company. Nope. Just like any (successful) business, making money is #1.

The books project is just another example of the company’s fantastic PR machine. People have bought into the idea that it was all about “sharing” information. Horse-hockey. Google doesn’t change a lightbulb without considering the fiscal implications of the act. By being the leader in the “all information should be free” movement, Google secures its financial future as the access point to that info.

Don’t forget, also, that Google is moving into media more and more each day. It wants content to be cheap so that it can provide it at a greater profit to itself. Whatever it can grab for free, it will, and not to benefit mankind but to make a buck.

I don’t fault the company for making money. I don’t fault it for being a huge corporation. And I don’t fault it for doing whatever it can (legally) to maximize its profits. I do fault those people who believe for a second that it does anything for any reason other than to make money.

I’m so excited! Most of you know, or should know, of Carolyn E. Wright, aka PhotoAttorney.com. Carolyn has been an IP attorney and a supporter of photographers’ rights for years. Her firm represents creative professionals, particularly photographers, and she has a great attitude about how to help her clients. Well, Carolyn and I have entered into a working relationship, and I think it’s a great collaboration!

As most of you are aware, I graduated law school in December and took the California Bar at the end of last month. However, I won’t get the results for months and, until I pass and get sworn in, I’m not a lawyer. I can’t take on legal clients or offer legal advice. I’m just a well-educated lay person. However, I can do some legally-related work, under the proper supervision of a licensed attorney. So, in this new relationship, I will be helping Carolyn out with some of the tasks related to her representation of her clients. It’s a great match, I think.

This does not mean I won’t be doing my usual consulting work–I will definitely be continuing that, don’t worry. Instead, in a part-time capacity, I will be working with Carolyn. I look forward to helping her (and her colleagues) help her clients and to learning more about effective representation from her.