(Update 7/7/11: After posting a link to this old 2009 post I realized that not all of the original links are still live. Rather than start modifying the following post, I will leave it as it was written, even though access to the original posted source material may no longer be possible. Aside from the specific contest – which is long since over – and any individual involved in it, the general lesson is that it is critical to read contest terms carefully before you decide to enter.)

(Update: I just receive a, uh, “personal” email from the contest promoter. I won’t share the content of that message here at this point, but I did write what I think was a very civilized email in reply,  I offered “Scott” the opportunity to post a response here as a comment, and I offered to correct any “false statements” in my post.)

(Update #2: “Jeff” says that that I was apparently incorrect about the lack of contest terms assigning legal liability to entrants: See these terms. This longer “terms” page also includes names of “vendor sponsors” who also have acquired rights to use submitted work.)

I’ve recently posted a few times on what I and others refer to as intellectual property rights grabs masquerading as photography contests. (For example, see this post describing unethical terms in contests presented by the Sierra Club and by Costco.) The short story is that entrants (not just winners!) in these contests agree to provide to the contest organizers and typically a whole range of their associates) a cost-free, unlimited, perpetual license to use their entered photographs in essentially any way imaginable (and some contest specify that even currently unimaginable methods are included!) without any compensation, credit, or control – and many additionally assign to the entrant full legal and financial liability for the use of the photograph.

Just because one enters the contest. That’s right. If you enter and lose – and the odds are that you will lose – you are fully subject to the contest terms.