July 2000 Selling Stock

published by Jim

Pickerell six times a year. The annual subscription rate is $80.00 to have the printed

version mailed to you. The on-line version is $72.00 per year. Subscriptions may be

obtained by writing Jim Pickerell, 10319 Westlake Drive, Suite 162, Bethesda, MD 20817, phone

301-251-0720, fax 301-309-0941, e-mail: jim@chd.com. All rights

are reserved and no information contained herein may be reporduced in any manner whatsoever

without written permission of the editor. Jim Pickerell is also co-owner of Stock

Connection, a stock agency. In addition, he is co-author with Cheryl Pickerell of

Negotiating Stock Photo Prices , a guide to pricing

June 14, 2000 - Between 280 and 300 Stone photographers earned in excess of $10,000

in 1st quarter 2000. Of these between 196 and 210 (70%) had 1st quarter 2000 earnings that

were 20% higher that 1st quarter 1999.

Approximately 150 (50% of the 300) Stone photographers saw their earnings increase by more

than 50% in the quarter compared with 1st quarter 1999.

This type of earnings growth would indicate that Stone has a large group of happy

photographers.

Based on information Selling Stock has received in the past from a small sample of

photographers we were very surprised when Getty Images reported that Stone's sales growth

for 1st quarter 2000 was 45% higher on a currency neutral basis than 1st quarter 1999.

Getty Images agreed to provide Selling Stock with additional detail in order to further

explain how this gross sales number is spread among the photographers.

On the basis of this information it is clear that, in contrast with much of the rest

of the industry, a significant number of Stone photographers are doing extremely

well, both in absolute dollar terms and in the percentage increases. It also seems

evident that wholly owned shoots are not a significant factor in the growth. Another

point worth noting is that the availability of RF through Getty Images is apparently

not killing licensed stock sales. Both RF and RP seem to be able to co-exist and

prosper together.

Getty Images told Selling Stock that, "20 percent of Stone photographers earned

$10,000 or more in the quarter," and that the total number of photographers who

earned in excess of $100 during the quarter was between 1400 and 1500. (It is

understandable that there may be a number of photographers who have images with

Stone, but have not submitted new images in a long time, and whose images still

generate an occasional sale. It is reasonable to exclude these people from the

"active" photographers list for the purpose of this type of calculation.)

It should also be noted that many of these 280-300 photographers are earning much

more than $10,000 per quarter, or much more than $40,000 annually. We did not ask

for, or expect to receive a breakdown of the higher numbers.

Another important factor to consider is what is happening to the 80% of photographers

(1120 to 1200) who earned less than $10,000 in the 1st quarter. About one-third of

this group (370 to 400) saw their earnings rise by more than 20 percent over the

first quarter of 1999. Another (370 to 400) had an earnings rise, but it was less

than 20%. Two thirds of the photographer who earned less than $10,000 in the quarter

saw an increase in their earnings. (In asking Stone to do these calculations we

picked the arbitrary 20% number believing that most photographers would be happy with

a 20% annual growth in sales.)

There were between 566 and 610 photographers (196 to 210 with royalties over $10,000

and 370 to 400 with royalties under $10,000) who had personal income growth from

Stone in excess of 20% on a year to year basis. Keep in mind that this is not all

Getty Images photographers, this is just Stone.

Getty Images stressed that they will not be providing this detail on a regular basis,

but they felt that it was appropriate for a one-time release.

Story 320

July 3, 2000 - The good news for Corbis photographers is that the company is

listening to their concerns and on at least one issue -- copyright ownership -- has

responded positively by making changes in the way copyright registration will be handled

when their new contract is presented to photographers later this summer.

After discussions with CEO Steve Davis, Director of Commercial Photography Leslie Hughes and

Corporate Counsel Dave Green, I am convinced that Corbis' intent all along -- and their

practices since establishing this copyright policy in 1995 -- have been in the best interest

of photographers.

However, contract language is extremely important and rules in the event of any dispute.

The language in the draft Corbis contract presented to a few photographers in March had some

serious flaws in the way it dealt with photographer's copyrights. APA (Advertising

Photographers of America) pointed out to Corbis that the proposed language created a risk of

blurring the extent of the photographer's copyright ownership. Corbis listened to the

photographer's concerns and modified the language. At this point I believe the new version

fully protects photographers rights.

Jeff Schewe, APA National President said, "Working with APA, David Green of Corbis has

drafted new language for their contract and Copyright Registration Program. The APA attorney

has reviewed the contract language and deemed it acceptable. It both clarifies the

copyright ownership rights of photographers as well as strengthens photographers' ability to

take the fullest advantage of U.S. Copyright Laws." The APA attorney also called this new

language a "suprisingly positive movememt on the part Corbis," given certain previous

positions in negotiations.

The New Language

The new language that photographers will be asked to agree to is as follows:

I have reviewed and wish to participate in the Corbis Copyright Registration

program. Solely for the purpose of registering my copyright on my behalf, I

hereby assign to Corbis the right, title and interest to the copyright in my

Accepted Images. Upon completion of the copyright registration process and

receipt of the copyright certificate covering my registered Accepted Images,

Corbis shall promptly re-assign in writing to me all of my right, title, and

interest in my Accepted Images that I transferred to Corbis. When re-assigning

my rights to me, Corbis shall retain no rights to the copyright in my Accepted

Images. Corbis shall retain ownership of the non-image elements that Corbis

creates and compiles in its digital files. However, this compilation shall not

permit Corbis to use any of my Accepted Images except as I have permitted under

the Photographer Representation Agreement that I have executed with Corbis. Any

Accepted Images that Corbis has previously registered on my behalf under its

Copyright Registration program shall be governed and interpreted by this

Agreement.

Signed [Photographer]

This language will be offered to both new photographers and to those who had

previously participated in Corbis' Copyright Registration program. All monies

recovered as the result of an infringement (after legal costs are deducted) are

shared on the same percentage basis as a normal sale, according to the

photographer's contract.

It is also important to note that participation in the Corbis Copyright

Registration Program is voluntary and at no cost to the photographer. The

photographer is given a choice. If he or she chooses not to participate that in

no way affects the rest of the contract. However, in my judgement, once

photographers fully understand the reasons for the program, and the benefits it

offers, most will choose to participate.

Important Factors To Consider

1 - In the U.S., in order to get the fullest protection in the event of

an infringement of copyright the image must have been registered at the U.S.

copyright office prior to the infringement.

If it is not registered you lose the ability to recover statutory damages,

court costs, and attorneys fees in an infringement suit, and are limited to

recovering only actual damages, or the normal fee that would have been charged

for the usage.

This registration requirement differs markedly from the copyright laws of most

of their countries, and is often difficult for photographers who live and work

outside the U.S. to understand. Nevertheless, it is absolutely necessary if a

photographer wants protection when infringements take place in the U.S.

2 - Statutory damages are the amount of damages a court can award in its

discretion against an infringer, without the owner of a work having to prove

that he or she was damaged. Statutory damages can be awarded up to $30,000 per

infringement and increased up to $150,000, in the event of willful infringement.

This risk will cause potential infringers to think twice about stealing an

image. On the other hand if the only punishment for stealing is that the

infringer must pay the same as if they had licensed the rights properly, there

is very little incentive, beyond an individuals basic moral code, to be honest.

3 - The normal process for registration is very time consuming and

costly. Because of this, most photographers do not register their images. As a

result, when an infringement is discovered most photographers are unable to

collect.

4 - There are certain procedures that have been mandated by the U.S.

Congress with relation to the registration of copyright. One on those

requirements is that only one individual or organization can apply for any

specific registration. An application can cover the work of many copyright

owners so long as the applicant has the clear legal right to act on their

behalf.

5 - The Copyright Office has some latitude in establishing administrative

procedures for registration, but they are also bound by certain requirements

that Congress has placed in the law.

6 - In the internet age, with digital delivery, and the ease of scanning

anything and everything, there is a great likelihood that there will be a lot

more infingements in the future. Thus, it is necessary to be more vigilant in

protecting your rights.

7 - In the past year Corbis has settled four separate infringements in

which they were required to show the copyright certificate before getting the

client to settle and pay. Corbis estimates that their recoveries would have

been less than a third of what they eventually were had the certificate not been

available. To date, no costly trials have been necessary. Once presented with

the certificate infringers have recognized that it is in their best interest to

settle quickly.

Why Is It Necessary Or Advisable To Transfer My Copyright To Anyone?

To answer this question it is necessary to understand the process established by

the copyright office for registering images in a digital database, and how it

differs from the normal registration process.

Corbis has been registering all new images it adds to its database on a

quarterly basis since 1995. The number of images in each registration has

varied from 6,000 to 30,000. Given the number of images they are adding to the

system they are planning to begin submitting registration applications monthly.

The normal system for registering images prior to publication is that each

individual photographer is required to provide some type of copy of every image,

fill out and sign an application form and pay a $30 fee for each separate

application. For agencies, this process had become impossible to administrate

when they were trying to protect all the images from hundreds of different

photographers in each new catalog they released.

According to Nancy E. Wolff, legal counsel for PACA, "The burden and expense of

this procedure resulted in a meeting five years ago among PACA (the then

President and the Legal Committee) and the Register of Copyrights, the Chief

Examiner and the Head of the Visual Arts Department at the Copyright Office. At

this meeting and through follow-up conversations, a recommended simplified

registration of catalogs was established. The only way to file ONE application,

is for the individual contributors to grant the agency legal title in the

photographs for copyright registration purposes. This protects the collection

of images (selection and arrangement) and any previously unpublished images

published in the catalog. Previously published images must still be registered

separately. The copyright can be reassigned to the photographer after

registration."

While this procedure was first provided for the publication of print catalogs,

the Copyright Office has applied the same rules to digital databases. According

to Ms. Wolff, "The Copyright Office has a database registration procedure that

permits the submission of a database of works on a CD-ROM and then allows the

registration of quarterly updates every three months."

To file their applications Corbis creates a CD-ROM with thumbnails of all images

that have been uploaded to their system within the previous three months. They

include the appropriate image ID numbers and the photographer's name with each

image. To the standard registration form they attach a list of all

photographers included on the disc and the number of images belonging to each

photographer. They also submit a sample color printout of approximately 50 of

the images on the disc. They are not required to provide a printed

representation of every image in the submission.

Line 4 on the copyright registration form mandated by the U.S. Congress asks the

following question about 'Copyright Claimants': "if the claimant(s) named here

are different from the author(s) give a brief statement of how the claimant(s)

obtained ownership of the copyright." The answer Corbis supplies here is, "By

agreement". Thus, if Corbis has a signed agreement from their photographer

allowing them to act in the photographer's behalf the copyright will be

effective. If there is no signed agreement the copyright for that particular

image would be judged invalid.

The next important question is how is the agreement assigned back to the

photographer?

As soon as the registration application is approved by the copyright office,

Corbis sends a letter to the photographer reassigning the copyright to the

photographer. The effective date of any copyright registration is the date the

Form VA application is accepted at the copyright office, not the date of final

approval of the application. However, given the work load at the Copyright

Office it often takes six to nine months from the date of filing before final

approval is given.

In cases where photographers have lost their assignment letter Corbis simply

submits another copy. Corbis maintains a database of all registered images with

the specific Corbis number for each image, the photographer's name and the

photographer's contract number. Thus, if the photographer ever needs to know

which registration number applies to a specific image Corbis can easily provide

that information to the photographer by searching their database.

The current language of the re-assignment letter is as follows:

REASSIGNMENT OF LEGAL TITLE

Corbis Corporation hereby reassigns all legal title (including all copyright) to

[Photographer] with respect to his/her/its registered image elements that are

covered under Certificate of Registration, number [Certificate Number], issued

by the U.S. Copyright Office, with an effective date of [Date], a copy of which

is attached hereto. The image elements covered by this reassignment are listed

by Corbis barcode numbers on the attachment hereto.

This reassignment does not include any non-image elements or the compilation

authored by Corbis that may be included in the copyright registration, which

remain subject to all terms and conditions of the License Agreement between

[Photographer] and Corbis.

Some photographers have expressed concern about a situation where an image is

placed online on January 5, an infringing use occurs on January 15 but the

quarterly registration for this group of images is not filed until March 31st.

Will the infringement be covered by the registration? The answer is YES. There

is a provision in the copyright law that says that in order to have the benefit of

statutory damages you must have registered prior to the infringement. The

exception is when the registration is filed within 90 days of first publication.

In that case the copyright holder is given statutory protection as if he or she

had registered within the 90 day period.

The procedure that Corbis has established provides the easiest and most cost

effective way for photographers to protect any image accepted for licensing by

Corbis. Photographers should register all other images they produce themselves,

but the process to accomplish this on an individual basis is much more

burdensome.

Michael Grecco has developed a system for registration that he uses in his

studio. He has set up a copy stand to make a single photograph of four sheets

of images at a time. Before images from a new shoot leave his office he edits

the material and makes a photocopy of every sheet of slides. He processes the

film, completes the copyright application form, attaches the slides to that form

and ships it in along with the $30 application fee. This process

certainly meets the registration requirements, but requires a great deal of

discipline to do it on every job.

Images that have been published prior to delivery to Corbis will not be

protected by the procedures outlined above. There are different rules for

published and unpublished images. Each published image requires a separate

registration (or if published in the same work, they may be registered

together). Photographers should check with the copyright office for the rules

on registering published images.

Steve Davis says, "It has never been the intent that Corbis would own the

photographer's copyright, other than for the limited purpose of economically and

efficiently registering the work for the photographer's benefit, and then

reassigning the copyright back.

As a result of extensive discussions with APA and many of our photographers we

believe the new language clarifies our position on our Copyright Registration

Program."

You can find more information about the Corbis Copyright Registration Program

at: http://www.corbisimages.com/copyright.

The copyright office regulations are available online at:

http://www.loc.gov/copyright/fls/fl107.pdf.

What Brought About The Changes

Jeff Schewe and the APA National Executive Board deserve major credit for

spearheading the drive to communicate the issues to Corbis. Frederic Neema

first brought the issue to APA's attention. The word was spread by Seth Resnick

and the Editorial Photographers (EP) forum as well as the PNN forum. Don

Mitchell, President of PPA also wrote to Corbis in support of cleaning up the

language in the copyright clause.

Jeff Schewe writes, "This is a really great example of what can be accomplished

when photographers actually work together to bring about change in the industry.

I hope this will be seen as a turning point that signals a change in the

industry's apathy of the last few years. Corbis has also indicated that this

will be the beginning of a collaboration with PPA and other industry leaders on

issues that are important to photographers."

Story 310

May 12, 2000 - Getty Images, Inc. has announced first quarter results that

significantly exceed

investor expectations. Revenue for the quarter rose to $104.8 million, up from $79.9

million in the 4th quarter of 1999. Wall Street analysts were predicting gross revenue of

approximately $85 million.

This impressive 31% growth was driven by recent acquisitions and by further growth in

e-commerce revenue. All brands had increases in volume and price, in all countries.

If we remove the two most recent acquisition TIB and VCG from the comparative figures

there was a 17% revenue growth for Stone, PhotoDisc, and the other Getty assets during the

quarter. That would put them on track for a 68% annual growth, but in his conference call

with investors Jonathan Klein reinterated that he was confortable with a 25-30% organic

growth for 2000. This is fantastic growth when compared with what appears to be happening

in the rest of the industry. Klein also said Getty's target for the next three years

was 25% annual growth.

Business-to-business transactions represent 96.4% of all revenue. The other 3.6% comes

from consumers. In talking about internet use Klein told investors during the conference

call, "In 99% of the cases the images still appear in print. The internet - as a market -

is

still in very early stages."

E-commerce

E-commerce revenue was up to $31.5 million. VCG and TIB, which were recently acquired,

did not contribute to this e-commerce revenue because their businesses were almost entirely

analog during the quarter. The $31.5 was up from $24.5 million in the the

4th quarter. In spite of the real growth of the e-commerce revenue, as a percentage of

total sales it was down slightly from 31% to 30%. E-commerce sales for the 3rd quarter of

1999 was at 32% of gross sales.

Klein has continually emphasized that recent growth is a result of the success of the

company's core strategy of pulling images out of filing cabinets and making them available

to clients on-line in an e-commerce environment. What's insteresting is that the

relationship

between e-commerce and analog sales seems to have stabilized at a comparatively low level of

e-commerce use. Both e-commerce and analog are growing at about the same rate. It will

be very interesting to see what happens in future quarters as TIB and

VCG are fully e-commerce enabled.

Getty has been trying to convert its business from delivering images by traditional

means to internet delivery. A year ago Klein and Mark Getty

were quoted as expecting 100% of their sales to be on-line within three years. By fall they

were estimating that eventually 60% of the business would be e-commerce. Right now it is

looking like there is some magic in the 30% e-commerce level. Photographers and competing

agents should closely monitor this trend.

TIB and VCG

Getty said that the $31.5 million was 38% of sales, "excluding TIB and VCG." That would

put gross sales, excluding these companies, at about $83 to $84 million. Thus, if

sales of VCG were $3.7 million sales of TIB would have been about $19 million. (TIB's

sales for 38 days at the end of the 4th quarter were $8.7 million. If we extrapolate

for a full quarter, level sales should have generated about $20.6 million. It is not

surprising that TIB sales would be level or down slightly until the integration is

complete.)

On the other hand VCG contributed $3.7 million to Getty's gross revenue, after being part

of Getty for only 9 days in March. That is an average $411,000 per day for a quarterly

rate of $37.5 million or $150 millon per year. It should be noted that VCG's 1999

revenues were only $90 million. Thus, there were probably some large, end of quarter,

payments that accrued to Getty rather than the former owners of VCG which, in effect,

represented more than just 9 days of revenue.

During the conference call Klein said TIB and VCG contributed almost nothing to 1st

quarter e-commerce sales, but Getty currently has 60,000 TIB images up on line. He also

said that VCG had a larger percentage of images scanned and ready

to go online than TIB, at the time of purchase of the two companies. He also added that

investors (and suppliers) should not expect the integration of VCG to be as fast as it

has been with TIB.

Klein said the integration of TIB is ahead of schedule and they have reduced the staff

head count by 120. They have closed the TIB headquarters office in Dallas and the offices

in Tuscon and Madison, Wisconsin. In this quarter they intend to close the San Francisco,

Atlanta and other Dallas offices and consoldiate all the New York offices to a single

location.

Stone Revenue Growth

Stone's revenues worldwide have grown 45% since April 1, 1999, and 70% in North America.

Getty didn't break out Stone's revenue, but by extrapolating from the press release

data provided, and other information I have obtained in the past few months, I estimate that

Stone's share of the $104.8 million was about $35 million for this quarter. Looking back

to the 1st quarter 1999, Stone's revenue at that time would have been approximately $23.5

million.

These numbers do not track at all with the information in Selling Stock's 1998 and 1999

photographer surveys. We had responses in those surveys from 46 photographers in 1998 and

47 in 1999. The average photographer share of the income from Stone in 1998 was $62,718

and $45,644 in 1999. (See Story

HREF="http://www.pickphoto.com/sso/Survey2000A"> 297

for more details.)

That doesn't indicate growth. Granted the surveys were not random,

and clearly the photographers responding must not be representative.

I believe sales of wholly owned images are the best explanation as to why Stone's

revenues

are headed in one direction while photographer royalty payments are headed in the other.

Klein was not specific on the amount of wholly owned sales, but he did make the point that

they contributed to the growth in EBITDA (profits) for the company.

Klein said that the "average transaction (at Stone) has broken through the $1000 mark."

This is up from about $800 a year ago. Klein also

said in the conference call that they are selling more images per transaction, but he

didn't give a number so it is impossible to calculate the average price per image sold

which is a number of much more interest to individual photographers. I had previously

heard a number of 1.7 images per transaction. I suspect the average is now somewhere

over 2 images per transaction.

Accounting For The Rapid Rise

It should be noted how rapid this one quarter rise is -- even for Getty. The following

are the revenue numbers for the last six quarters for Getty. (The dollar figures are in

millions.)

Note that the 3rd quarter revenue was impacted by the acquisition of EyeWire and the 4th

quarter was impacted by a full quarter of EyeWire, $8.7 million from TIB, and $4.3 million

from Art.com and American Royal Arts.

I see no indications that there are any factors that occurred in the first quarter of 2000

that would have caused a major growth in industry usage as a whole. Certainly nothing

that would result in an almost doubling of revenue growth from the previous quarter, which

is what occurred for Getty's major brands. The rise can not be attributed to increased

use of e-commerce as explained above. It seems to me that this additional growth, over and

above their normal levels, must be attributed

almost entirely to Getty taking market share from other stock photo sellers.

In his conference call with investors Jonathan Klein said, "We are continuing to take

market share from the vast bulk of the mom and pop companies, as well as to continue to

beat the Corbis brands in the market. The competive environment is wholly favorable to

Getty images. We have always beaten those brands (the ones recently acquired by Corbis)

in the market and the fact that they are

now owned by another company makes absolutely no difference in the day to day battle for

sales which year after year we continue to win."

Breakdown of Revenue

As we noted earlier Getty does not break down revenue by brand, but it is helpful for

photographers to have some idea of what the brands with which they are involved are

generating and how they contribute to the whole company. Based on information Getty

provided in

the press release and the conference call, and other information I have obtained over the

past few months I have made the following approximations of 1st quarter 2000 revenue.

The following indicates the respective share I believe each brand contributed to the

e-commerce revenues of $31.5 million.

Other Information

Klein said that 20% of the business is coming from new customers. About half of the

registered user have not used the brands previously.

Getty will be launching a system - probably in the 4th quarter - to handle digital asset

management for others who want to move images on the internet. This is a major business

for PictureQuest, and evidentially Getty intends to move into that market. Klein pointed

out that many of their press customers

want assistance in moving image files, and in marketing some of the images they produce.

According to Klein they will have a system where images can be uploaded within ten or

fifteen minutes of shooting. The schedule is to roll out the system for a few customers

in time for the Olympics, and make it fully available in the 4th quarter.

Getty has 47.6 million shares outstanding and had a basic loss per share for the quarter

of $.46. (The loss per share excludes integration and restructuring costs, debt

conversion expenses and extraordinary items.) The stock market seemed to ignore Getty's

great revenue story. The stock price went down 10% to 29 3/16th on the day of the

announcement.

Story 315

June 14, 2000 - In early 2000 StockAgencies.com conducted a phone and fax survey of 379 U.S. based stock

photo agencies and asked, "How many photographs does your agency have scanned and keyworded

for CD or web catalogs?"

Seventy three agencies (19% of the total queried) reported that they have a total of

15,153,883 photos scanned and keyworded. Very few agencies chose not to respond.

Six agencies reported 1 million or more images scanned. When these largest agencies were

excluded, the 67 remaining agencies had a total of 3,853,883 scanned and keyworded for an

average of 57,521 photos per agency.

Forty four agencies reported 10,000 images or less scanned and keyworded. These 44 had a

total of 134,883 images scanned and keyworded, averaging 3,066 per agency.

Not indicated in the statistics were many comments by smaller agencies that indicated

development of consistent, ongoing scanning and keywording programs that would result in

dramatic increases of content available for digital databases.

Story 315

May 24, 2000 - Jonathan Klein told Getty investors recently that 99% of all uses of stock images are still

for print purposes. He said, "Online use is in the future."

This number is worth considering, as there has been a great deal of talk in the last few

years about the growth in overall usage that was likely to occur because of all the new uses

of images that would appear on the web.

Certainly there has been a spectacular growth in web pages in the last few years and many

of them use still images. On the other hand, if Getty's experiences are representative,

these uses are not translating into bottom line dollars for the stock photo industry.

Assuming that Klein's number is relatively accurate (it was an off-the-cuff response to a

question so it may not be statistically precise), Getty would have had slightly over $1

million in sales for on-line uses in 1st Quarter 2000. That would mean that at best, for the

entire industry, worldwide, on-line usage might have been slightly above $3 million for the

quarter. We also need to remember that within Getty's figures are sales of the largest RF

company, PhotoDisc, which is likely to be one of the first companies to benefit from on-line

uses.

U.S. ad spending for on-line uses in 1999 was estimated at $2.8 billion according to

Forrester Research while total ad spending in all media was estimated by Robert Coen of

McCann-Erickson Worldwide Universal at $215 billion. Thus, the $2.8 billion is very close to

1%.

Looking to the future, Forrester estimates that in 2004 on-line U.S. advertising uses will

generate $22.2 billion with total advertising spending being around $271 billion.

Some companies report that they have not cut their advertising budgets for traditional

media and they are funding on-line advertising with monies from non-advertising marketing

budgets like sales staff and promotions. Others are getting funds from IPO's and venture

capital sources.

However, many are cutting back on traditional advertising budgets. Newspapers are hardest

hit. Close to 10% of what had previously been budgeted for newspaper advertising is now used

to fund on-line advertising. The direct mail sector is expected to be next hardest hit and

magazine advertising will also be reduced to pay for the internet.