Competition term and conditiions

[ricktas]

I frequently get emails from people wanting to promote some product or service on AP. Funnily as soon as I tell them there is an advertising fee, I dont hear from most of them again.

But today I received an email from a huge (multinational) health insurance company, that makes $Millions in profit each year. They wanted me to promote their latest competition on AP. So being inquisitive, I had a read through the entry terms and conditions and found this doozie:


Entrants, Finalists and Winners consent to *health fund* using their name, likeness, image and/or voice (including photograph, film and/or recording of the same) in any digital, social or traditional media for an unlimited period without remuneration for the purpose of the 2016 *health fund* Blog Awards (including any outcome), and promoting any products manufactured, distributed and/or supplied by *health fund*.

So not only can they use your entry, but your name, likeness, image and voice to promote their products etc. WOW. So if you entered, note only entered, not won, you could find your name and photo being used in advertising to promote health insurance, life insurance, aged care facilities and more that are owned by this health fund.

Wouldn't it be lovely to turn the tv one one evening and see your photo and name promoting a health fund...?? and you do not get a cent for it!

So I told them what I thought in a reply email. If you want to know which health fund click here (http://www.bupa.com.au/), and if you want to see the actual competition, click here (http://theblueroom.bupa.com.au/blogawards). But my opinion is read the terms and conditions fully..and do not enter!

[mpb]

Hmmm, I might enter, I would like to see them use my likeness or image, I don't think it would be good for a health fund business.:o

[Mark L]

Buga.

[ameerat42]

What a loathe of hoth air:rolleyes:

[mikew09]

Well done Rick on your forensic investigation to identify their intentions. Go work mate ;-)

[Mary Anne]

Greed comes to mind here, the more you've got the more you want.

[ricktas]

As an update. They got back to me re my email and stated

"We completely understand if you would rather not promote these awards, but our intention is very much to reward and celebrate those with a positive health and care message. Apologies if that has not come across".

So I have replied and asked. If your 'intention' is not to steal people's work, how about removing that clause from your terms and conditions?".

I await their reply.

[ricktas]

So the reply is:

"That's a great point Rick and something we'll flag with Bupa. Appreciate your time"

So will be interesting to see if they do remove it.

[ameerat42]

It's good they got a serve. More such need one:nod:
Teach 'em to put some thought into it next time - one hopes.

[Mark L]

Interesting you've been getting replies to your emails Rick.
Seems like over to Bupa now. Buga.

[jim]

Likely they just imposed a set of more or less standard conditions, without any real intention to rip anybody off. This sort of nonsense still needs to be called out though, so good work, Rick.

[Hamster]

This is incredibly common. A recent competition near me stated that you handed over copyright by entering :-0. Many competitions are rights grabbing exercises (e.g. The one the West Australian holds every so often). Some just use lazy lawyers who know nothing about copyright to create catch all statements that ensure their client is completely covered. I've written to a couple of companies saying I'd like to enter your competition but the terms are too onerous. How about you just use a non exclusive licence clause for a period of a year or something?
One didn't reply, the other said they knew nothing about this and (lazy) lawyers had advised they used the terms.

[ameerat42]

...One didn't reply, the other said they knew nothing about this and (lazy) lawyers had advised they used the terms...

Some people only know the butt end of the alimentary canal:rolleyes::D

[Mark L]

Likely they just imposed a set of more or less standard conditions, without any real intention to rip anybody off.
This looks like a variation on them standards actually.;)

They are a pretty big business and should now better. Plenty of big businesses know better and do it anyway for what they can get for free.
And don't forget the reason for this thread was an approach to AP via Rick by people trying to promote something with an intention wider than usual.

"G'day Rick,
We'd like to offer some AP members ...... (insert prize or $$ amount) ..... if they'd like to offer some photos for us to use as we'd like.
Shit, based on our current T&Cs , just remember there's no way we'd be using that Mark L. bloke in any way. A loser like that might buga Bupa."

[J.davis]

A lady here in Ipswich entered a Council comp last year and didn't win, but her photo submission is being used to promote this years comp (free of charge).
I complained about the non remuneration and lack of council photogs and got put down as the council are good people and are doing the right thing.
The use of entries are in the terms and conditions though.

[ricktas]

A lady here in Ipswich entered a Council comp last year and didn't win, but her photo submission is being used to promote this years comp (free of charge).
I complained about the non remuneration and lack of council photogs and got put down as the council are good people and are doing the right thing.
The use of entries are in the terms and conditions though.

Exactly. Happens all the time and if you entered and did not read all the T&C, then sadly she has no-one to blame, but herself.

[ameerat42]

Still, a good lecture on the alimentary canal...:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[danny]

a nieve question... do you think people sit around inside these companies and try to come up with ways of getting images for free? Because it certainly looks that way.

[ricktas]

a nieve question... do you think people sit around inside these companies and try to come up with ways of getting images for free? Because it certainly looks that way.

Of course they do!

[Hamster]

a nieve question... do you think people sit around inside these companies and try to come up with ways of getting images for free? Because it certainly looks that way.

If you want to be cynical and discount a lack of understanding of copyright and/or lazy lawyering, the majority of the smaller comps are created for this reason. Companies look to provide themselves with a cheap source of images, but I'm guessing some would sell them on to stock photography sites and other third parties.

[bobt]

So the reply is:

"That's a great point Rick and something we'll flag with Bupa. Appreciate your time"

So will be interesting to see if they do remove it.

I wouldn't hold your breath on that one! I think you were lucky to get a reply at all.
i think they probably work on the basis that few people read the fine print (or even the not so fine print!)

What can you expect from a company that spends zillions changing their name to one that has absolutely no meaning at all - to anyone!

Well spotted though ....... :th3:

[ricktas]

I wouldn't hold your breath on that one! I think you were lucky to get a reply at all.
i think they probably work on the basis that few people read the fine print (or even the not so fine print!)

What can you expect from a company that spends zillions changing their name to one that has absolutely no meaning at all - to anyone!

Well spotted though ....... :th3:

BUPA is a British company that has existed for a long time (1947). They were formed with the joining of 17 smaller health funds into one. They came to notice into Australia when they purchased MBF. They already owned two smaller health insurance companies here. BUPA stands for British United Provident Association. They are a massive multi-national company.. one you think could pay people to be able to use "using their name, likeness, image and/or voice (including photograph, film and/or recording of the same) in any digital, social or traditional media" and more.

[bobt]

BUPA is a British company that has existed for a long time (1947). They were formed with the joining of 17 smaller health funds into one. They came to notice into Australia when they purchased MBF. They already owned two smaller health insurance companies here. BUPA stands for British United Provident Association. They are a massive multi-national company.. one you think could pay people to be able to use "using their name, likeness, image and/or voice (including photograph, film and/or recording of the same) in any digital, social or traditional media" and more.

Well now that IS interesting! I went into BUPA shop a long while back when I was lodging a claim, and I asked them why the stupid name change. They told me that there wasn't any meaning behind the name - it was just thought up by an ad agency.
Just goes to show you that not even the staff have a clue.

Thanks for that ..... mind you, I still think it's a stupid name. :D

[ameerat42]

.... mind you, I still think it's a stupid name. :D...

I :nod:gree! - And it should be followed by "Excuse me!"

(Classic about the staff! - How mental!)

[Mark L]

.... mind you, I still think it's a stupid name. :D

and the next member that posts ........ ,your excused.:D