<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title> &#187; sotomayor photographers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://peterhoffmanphoto.com/blog/tag/sotomayor-photographers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://peterhoffmanphoto.com/blog</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 23:09:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The current value of photographs</title>
		<link>http://peterhoffmanphoto.com/blog/2009/07/18/the-current-value-of-photographs/</link>
		<comments>http://peterhoffmanphoto.com/blog/2009/07/18/the-current-value-of-photographs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 23:38:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the state of things]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corbis lost pictures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corbis ruling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sotomayor photographers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterhoffmanphoto.com/blog/?p=812</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tweet$7 &#8230;.?? So agrees Sotomayor. This court ruling, in which Sotomayor had connections to the defendant (never disclosed) says effectively that a photojournalist&#8217;s original work that were lost by Corbis were worth $7 a piece. They lost a lot of images, so he walked away with a $100,000+ settlement, but this is nothing in terms [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tw_button" style=";float:right;margin-left:10px;"><a href="http://twitter.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftinyurl.com%2F6dyg3zp&amp;via=peterghoffman&amp;text=The%20current%20value%20of%20photographs&amp;related=&amp;lang=en&amp;count=horizontal&amp;counturl=http%3A%2F%2Fpeterhoffmanphoto.com%2Fblog%2F2009%2F07%2F18%2Fthe-current-value-of-photographs%2F" class="twitter-share-button" id="tweetbutton812" style="width:55px;height:22px;background:transparent url('http://peterhoffmanphoto.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/wp-tweet-button/tweetn.png') no-repeat  0 0;text-align:left;text-indent:-9999px;display:block;">Tweet</a></div><p>$7 &#8230;.?? So agrees Sotomayor. This court ruling, in which Sotomayor had connections to the defendant (never disclosed) says effectively that a photojournalist&#8217;s original work that were lost by Corbis were worth $7 a piece. They lost a lot of images, so he walked away with a $100,000+ settlement, but this is nothing in terms of getting Corbis to respect the work they are holding. Lose original work and pay a few relative &#8220;pennies&#8221;. Now, I know there are photographers out there who do nothing but shout about how undervalued the industry is, and many of them are more concerned with money than with making good work, but this reference could be a scary reference for future suits. As for me, and as for most other photographers out there, I think we should just keep doing what we love and fight for respect for it, but not more than we need.</p>
<p><a title="http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/behind-6/" href="http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/behind-6/"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-813" title="picture-2" src="http://peterhoffmanphoto.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/picture-2.png" alt="" width="500" height="536" /></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterhoffmanphoto.com/blog/2009/07/18/the-current-value-of-photographs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

