People Magazine iPad App Launch Stalled by Photographer Disputes

Publishers are clamoring to get their magazine titles onto Apple’s iPad, but many may be facing a new challenge: photographers.

The Hollywood Reporter reports that Time Inc. has been forced to delay the release of its People magazine iPad app, in part because of disputes with photo agencies over licensing agreements as they pertain to the iPad.

Time Inc. has already released iPad variants of its Time, Fortune and Sports Illustrated titles, and had hoped to launch People earlier this month.

While a spokeswoman for People says that the iPad application launch delay has “absolutely nothing to do with the photo agencies,” statements from various agencies belie those claims. THR reports that at least eight different agencies are banding together to withhold their photographs unless People grants them additional compensation for iPad usage.

In other words, if People doesn’t agree to pay more to use photographs in the iPad app, the magazine will have a much more difficult time obtaining photos of Lindsay Lohan once she leaves rehab.

Photo agencies that sell celebrity photographs to media publications like People make the majority of their revenue by selling the print rights to those photographs. Online usage fees command a much smaller price, in part because online photos rarely generate significant ad or subscription revenue. As Brandy Navarre, VP at X17 notes, “When you’re talking about paid apps supplemented by advertisements, that’s something different altogether.”

People’s position is that it shouldn’t have to pay anything to use the photographs because the iPad app is just a replication of the print product. Aside from paying for any photos that aren’t in the print edition — for things like photo galleries — People thinks its current contract with photographers should cover iPad usage.

Furthermore, People also argues that because it views the iPad app as a marketing tool, it can use photographs under a clause in its contract with photographers that allows for promotional repurposing.

Photographers and photo agencies, already feeling the pressure of an ad recession, don’t want to write off their rights and fees for what many think could end up being the next big avenue for publishing. Agencies want to avoid what happened to many unions when the DVD platform took off. It took a prolonged writers’ strike for the WGA to gain royalties from DVD and digital sales of its members’ work.

So why are other magazines not facing the same pressures as People? In part because People has the highest circulation in its field — more than 3.5 million for the first half of 2010 — and as THR notes, it has a much more diversified agency pool than many of its competitors. People is also known for being willing to shell out big money for exclusive photographs at a level that other publications just can’t match.

The resolution with People could end up having a big impact on other photo-heavy publications that want to bring content to the iPad or other tablets.

The evolution of publishing is certainly taking place digitally — and often online. The debate raises an important question that many publishers are still trying to find an answer to: Where does the line between digital and web publication lie? Furthermore, do those differences necessitate different rules for licensing, pricing and access?

What do you think? Let us know your thoughts in the comments