Tutorial Copyrights/Law and other info about photos

Jamesbuk

Jamesbuk

Messages
802
Name
James Betts
Edit My Images
Yes
Jamesbuk submitted a new resource:

Copyrights/Law and other info about photos - Copyrights/Law and other info about photos

Hey guys and girls,

As per discussion in the "Forum Discussion" forum.. it has been decided to have a thread with all the info about copyright and basic laws on photography so that we dont have so many threads asking the same questions.

If you have a link/info that you think could be important or useful to any other photographer then please post it here! but it must come from a valid source!

First of all.. A...
Click to expand...

Read more about this resource...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
UK Copyright service:

Clicky

An in depth look at copyright, and how it affects photographers.
 
I have a question about the copyright of wedding photos. I have just done an album for one of my clients and had it delivered to her office. One of her colleagues was so impressed with it they've asked me to make an album up from the photos from their own wedding. The thing is that I didn't take them and they have them on CD from their own photographer.

In principal, and assuming the photos are good enough for the album, I don't have an issue with doing the design work. What concerns me though is would it be a breach of the other photographer's copyright if I made an album, possibly altering the photos (B&W, cropping etc), and then made a profit from it? I put a clause in my contracts that if I give the couple the photos on CD then they cannot be used commercially but I'm not sure if that covers this situation as I'd just be charging them for the design and the cost of the album.

Any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
ranarama said:
I have a question about the copyright of wedding photos. I have just done an album for one of my clients and had it delivered to her office. One of her colleagues was so impressed with it they've asked me to make an album up from the photos from their own wedding. The thing is that I didn't take them and they have them on CD from their own photographer.

In principal, and assuming the photos are good enough for the album, I don't have an issue with doing the design work. What concerns me though is would it be a breach of the other photographer's copyright if I made an album, possibly altering the photos (B&W, cropping etc), and then made a profit from it? I put a clause in my contracts that if I give the couple the photos on CD then they cannot be used commercially but I'm not sure if that covers this situation as I'd just be charging them for the design and the cost of the album.

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Both you and your client would be breaching copyright.
 
EOS_JD said:
Both you and your client would be breaching copyright.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I presumed that was the case. I've asked them to provide written permission from their photographer before going any further.
 
ranarama said:
I have a question about the copyright of wedding photos. I have just done an album for one of my clients and had it delivered to her office. One of her colleagues was so impressed with it they've asked me to make an album up from the photos from their own wedding. The thing is that I didn't take them and they have them on CD from their own photographer.

In principal, and assuming the photos are good enough for the album, I don't have an issue with doing the design work. What concerns me though is would it be a breach of the other photographer's copyright if I made an album, possibly altering the photos (B&W, cropping etc), and then made a profit from it? I put a clause in my contracts that if I give the couple the photos on CD then they cannot be used commercially but I'm not sure if that covers this situation as I'd just be charging them for the design and the cost of the album.

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...



It's usual for a photographer when handing over a cd of images to give them a letter of authority informing them they have free license, though rarely copyright

If they have such a letter, or it's implied via the condition of sale, then you are not infringing copyright. It's no different to them taking the cd to boots and doing a bit of cropping etc.there. Boots will want sight of such authority, then they're free to do anything

If their tog sold them the shots on cd, and didn't hand over such a letter then yes you could be in breach - but him doing so would be stupid as what does one expect people to do when you hand over images they can edit/print? So while it may be a breach, I doubt a court would bother to take their tog's side

Other than that... how the Hell would he ever find out, and unless you also print your details on the album (and give no credit to him) why would he care?

DD
 
Can anyone give me any guidance on the implications of Crown Copyright? I've heard the quote 'taken on the orders or time of the Crown.' If this is the case then surely every photo taken in a military aircraft is the property of the Crown. Where does the intellectual property of the photographer come in? Would Crown Copyright stand up in modern court?

Thanks in advance,

Cheesy
 
Cheesy said:
Can anyone give me any guidance on the implications of Crown Copyright? I've heard the quote 'taken on the orders or time of the Crown.' If this is the case then surely every photo taken in a military aircraft is the property of the Crown. Where does the intellectual property of the photographer come in? Would Crown Copyright stand up in modern court?

Thanks in advance,

Cheesy
Click to expand...

It probably depends on whether the photographer was employed by the Crown when the pic was taken - or whether that particular arm of "The Crown" has obtained copyright from the photographer by whatever means. Presumably pics taken by air force personnel from military aircraft are automatically Crown copyright.

Another user of the term Crown Copyright is the Welsh Assembly Government. The background to this is that the Welsh Tourist Board used to employ a copyright grab on all the freelance photographers it employed. In other words the WTB would not commission you unless you agreed to hand over copyright.

The WTB was absorbed into the WAG, which, despite a campaign by some Welsh photographers, took the WTB model for dealing with photographers as its own. As far as I know, all photographers working for any of the government bodies in Wales are now required to hand over copyright, and their pictures become "Crown Copyright".
 
If you took the photograph you own the copyright - you can transfer the copyright to someone else i.e. if its a wedding you can give all the photos on cd and a copyright release to the client so they can have photos prints. The big drawback here is if they have them done in a 1hr place which hasnt calibrated their equipment right they they will receive possibly horrendous photographs with colour casts etc. This will reflect badly on you as potential clients think that is the quality of the photographs you will give them.

If you are employed as a photographer i.e. for a newspaper/magazine etc., your employer will no doubt have got you to sign a form saying that copyright will be theirs and not yours even though you took the photograph. Check out the form you signed as a friend had to sign one prior to starting work with a newspaper and then found the copyright for "all" photographs she took would be the property of her employers even if she took photographs "outside working hours".
 
joryannee said:
If you are employed as a photographer i.e. for a newspaper/magazine etc., your employer will no doubt have got you to sign a form saying that copyright will be theirs and not yours even though you took the photograph.
Click to expand...

If you're employed then there's no need to sign a form, copyright is the employer's automatically.
 
joryannee said:
If you took the photograph you own the copyright - you can transfer the copyright to someone else i.e. if its a wedding you can give all the photos on cd and a copyright release to the client so they can have photos prints. The big drawback here is if they have them done in a 1hr place which hasnt calibrated their equipment right they they will receive possibly horrendous photographs with colour casts etc. This will reflect badly on you as potential clients think that is the quality of the photographs you will give them.

If you are employed as a photographer i.e. for a newspaper/magazine etc., your employer will no doubt have got you to sign a form saying that copyright will be theirs and not yours even though you took the photograph. Check out the form you signed as a friend had to sign one prior to starting work with a newspaper and then found the copyright for "all" photographs she took would be the property of her employers even if she took photographs "outside working hours".
Click to expand...

Ok so now I know that all photos taken by me are automatically covered by copyright, how do I add this as a footer to my photos?
 
Hi all - read the Copyright link but would still like to clear up one point before I potentially get into trouble!

Recently did the wedding of someone in the public eye and as a result there were a few well known faces there! All was a success and I had a prior verbal agreement from the Bride (I know her well), that I could use some of the images on my website. All well and good but will this cover the shots of other celebs who were at the wedding or do I need to obtain their permission independently? They are all my images but just concerned after reading about using famous faces to promote a money making venture?

To sum up: If I take a photo of a celeb and it's my copyright, do I need to ask their permission or is it just polite?

Thanks in advance!
 
Nix77 said:
All well and good but will this cover the shots of other celebs who were at the wedding or do I need to obtain their permission independently? They are all my images but just concerned after reading about using famous faces to promote a money making venture?

To sum up: If I take a photo of a celeb and it's my copyright, do I need to ask their permission or is it just polite?
Click to expand...

Someone's fame does not change how the law applies to them. You can use the images in the same way as you would use the images of 'ordinary' people.


Steve.
 
Another good resource on the subject is the PhotoLegal podcast - it's a bi-weekly podcast hosted by a professional photographer, an amateur photographer, a national newspaper journalist and, obviously, a lawyer.
 
Thanks Guys. I was pretty sure that was the case - it was more my friends (non-photographers) who started questioning whether I was allowed and I started questioning it myself!!
 
Hi i'm new on here!!!
i found one of my images on a holiday website (http://hotelburst.co.uk/greece/karavados/0/472363.html) they have not asked me if they can use my image! the image is copyrighted and is on Flickr. i want to send them a bill for using my image whats the best way of going about this.

Yiamas!!
 
Last edited:
Just thought I'd add this link which is one of the most comprehensive studies on Copywright for Photographers. There's a lot of text, but it's in plain old English and is easy to understand. Well worth a read.

There's also a commitment from the author to keep it updated as Copywright law changes.

Ian.
 
The copywrite stuff really interests me but also scares me a reasonable amount too! I'm only an amateur but enjoy taking photos at events I go to such as Wimbledon, Wembley and a recent trip to Battersea Powerstation for the X-fighters.

I believe that as I'm paying to enter - and so not open to the public as such - I can only publsih the images for non-commercial purposes. I've uploaded the better ones to flickr and got a lot of interest in images of Federer at Wimbledon on day one. Some small websites have used my images - is this allowed? Are "news" websites commercial?

I really want to share my images and flattered to get them published online, but am I in breach of any rules?

Wimlbedon's admittance to Wimbledon guidelines state:

Still photographs, film, videotape or other audio-visual material recorded within the Grounds may not be sold or used commercially in any way whatsoever unless authorised by the AELTC and may be confiscated by the Club if such sale or commercial use is suspected.

http://aeltc2010.wimbledon.org/en_GB/about/tickets/conditions_entry.html
 
Cheers Mike. I think my problem is the whole definition of "commercial use" - is a news / sport website commercial use? Does it change if they have adverts? What if it's subscription based? Can you ever get paid for use of the photo?
 
Hiya all im new to the site and very new to copyright laws.i need some advise if poss im confussed about copyright i have taken 26 photos of a family and they only want 10 do i copyrigh the 10 photos? and what do i do with the ones they dont want,once they have paid for them do they then own copyright for them and print them in lets say boots? i have offered cds with some of my packages and she asked if she could take the cd to get more and bigger prints is that alowed or does she need to come back to me for more prints.....im sooo new to this and would love a reply thanks.
 
emzz said:
Hiya all im new to the site and very new to copyright laws.i need some advise if poss im confussed about copyright i have taken 26 photos of a family and they only want 10 do i copyrigh the 10 photos? and what do i do with the ones they dont want,once they have paid for them do they then own copyright for them and print them in lets say boots? i have offered cds with some of my packages and she asked if she could take the cd to get more and bigger prints is that alowed or does she need to come back to me for more prints.....im sooo new to this and would love a reply thanks.
Click to expand...

Hi Emzz, welcome to the site.

The general thing to remember is that you, as the photographer, own the copyright to any photo you take. You don't have to do anything for this to happen, you automatically own the rights to your shots as soon as you take them.
If you take photos for a customer/family then you own the rights to those photos as long as you haven't explicitly sold the copyright to them - often you'll have agreed to take the photos and provide a set number of prints since it's the prints where you can make repeat sales.

In theory at least, even if you give them a disc with files on, you still own the copyright to the photos and they shouldn't make prints without your approval. In practice most people don't realise this and will happily print all they like once they've got hold of the files.

The exact details depend on what you've agreed with your customer - if you're not making money from prints and it's a family shoot so there's no real benefit in you keeping it then you may decide that it's more straightforward to give/sell the copyright and just let them do what they like with the prints. If you are making money from the prints then it might be a better idea to hang on to the copyright and the files so that you can control (and charge for) any extra prints.
 
Hi,

I have an (as yet) unconfirmed report that someone has painted a landscape picture of mine and is selling it at an art stall. I'll check this out tomorrow hopefully but from what I can tell from info online this painter has infringed my copyright but not asking permission. It's also apparently an exact copy of my photograph. So I'm just wondering if I have any recourse when I confront the artist?

I might argue that he should pay me a usage fee before he tries to sell this commercially. Tbh I don't particularly mind as it's probably no more than him not realising it's against the law but there's always the possibility that he decides to sell prints of his painting at a later date and then it gets serious! So I'd like to confront this sooner rather than later.

Any advice on what I can do?

Cheers
Ian :)
 
imonk said:
Hi,

I have an (as yet) unconfirmed report that someone has painted a landscape picture of mine and is selling it at an art stall. I'll check this out tomorrow hopefully but from what I can tell from info online this painter has infringed my copyright but not asking permission. It's also apparently an exact copy of my photograph. So I'm just wondering if I have any recourse when I confront the artist?

I might argue that he should pay me a usage fee before he tries to sell this commercially. Tbh I don't particularly mind as it's probably no more than him not realising it's against the law but there's always the possibility that he decides to sell prints of his painting at a later date and then it gets serious! So I'd like to confront this sooner rather than later.

Any advice on what I can do?

Cheers
Ian :)
Click to expand...

Sounds like that's going to be a tough one - for a start, are you sure they've not just gone to the same location and looked at the same view? I suppose if there are distinctive features in your shot that have been replicated in the painting then you might get somewhere.
Good luck though, let us know how you get on!
 
imonk said:
Hi,

I have an (as yet) unconfirmed report that someone has painted a landscape picture of mine and is selling it at an art stall. I'll check this out tomorrow hopefully but from what I can tell from info online this painter has infringed my copyright but not asking permission. It's also apparently an exact copy of my photograph. So I'm just wondering if I have any recourse when I confront the artist?

I might argue that he should pay me a usage fee before he tries to sell this commercially. Tbh I don't particularly mind as it's probably no more than him not realising it's against the law but there's always the possibility that he decides to sell prints of his painting at a later date and then it gets serious! So I'd like to confront this sooner rather than later.

Any advice on what I can do?

Cheers
Ian :)
Click to expand...

Are you sure like noted above he's just not been to the same place? Might be tough to prove.
 
Thanks for the comments guys. You're right that it could be tricky to prove but there's two reasons that make me so confident I can:

1. The painting is clearly taken from an photo originally and so if they've taken the photo then they can surely show me a copy of it.

2. The chances of someone taking exactly the same photo and processing it exactly the same way are almost impossible. I mean it's exact.

Have a look and see what you think...

Here's my image...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/32978793@N05/5447798744/#/

And you'll see their picture at the top of this page...

http://www.simpsonfineart.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=45&products_id=354

Now that flare at the right side of the image is a power station quite far away burning off some excess fuel. I've never seen that in any other picture of the bridges. Also, the focal length, the perspective, the processing all must have been the same for it to be that identical, not to mention the weather!!

Oh and they are obviously selling prints online too. So what do you think. I could be wrong but that definitely looks like a copy to me...

Ian
 
[update]

Spoken to the Artist and it looks as though he received the pics from someone who assured him they had copyright. They came from a print I sold to a work colleague of my wife a few years ago. It looks as though it's a genuine mistake, however I now need to figure out a fair usage fee for them to keep selling it. Problem is, if it's more than they want to pay, they'll doctor the picture to look different enough to sell anyway. They seem fair though!

Any advice on a fair usage? Not sure even whether to put a time limit on it. Going to check Alamy and other stock sites but they're usually quite highly priced!

Lesson learned for artists: Always check with the photographer and don't trust someone who walks in off the street to know about copyright laws!

Lesson learned for photographers: Even if it's a sale to a friend of the family make sure you make the terms crystal clear Doh :bonk:

Any advice on usage greatly appreciated :thinking:

Cheers
Ian
 
Get a small cut of the sales if you can.....
 
Take a stock image - you git a tiny proportion! Small is probably about right :)
 
imonk said:
[update]

Spoken to the Artist and it looks as though he received the pics from someone who assured him they had copyright. They came from a print I sold to a work colleague of my wife a few years ago. It looks as though it's a genuine mistake, however I now need to figure out a fair usage fee for them to keep selling it. Problem is, if it's more than they want to pay, they'll doctor the picture to look different enough to sell anyway. They seem fair though!

Any advice on a fair usage? Not sure even whether to put a time limit on it. Going to check Alamy and other stock sites but they're usually quite highly priced!

Lesson learned for artists: Always check with the photographer and don't trust someone who walks in off the street to know about copyright laws!

Lesson learned for photographers: Even if it's a sale to a friend of the family make sure you make the terms crystal clear Doh :bonk:

Any advice on usage greatly appreciated :thinking:

Cheers
Ian
Click to expand...

Rather hoisted by your own petard with those comments as there is no such concept as fair use under British law.

You might be referring to fair abridgement, but that's an entirely different concept.

This would class as a commercial licence, and since they are directly selling the product, rather than using it for promotion, I'd be looking for a healthy three figure sum at the very least.
 
Hi all, I'm new on here long time picture taker short time charging for it.

I did some work for an event company who agreed a day rate for my work which was fine, I had a contact via email stating they would pay me X amount and they would be able to sell the photos, it had a typed in signature on it, not that a typed signature should make a difference, should it? I didnt sign it and return it as I wanted to see how it panned out.

The company said they would pay on the day. At the end of the day they said they hadn't got the money to pay me. I made it clear I wanted the money sent to me via a cheque which hasn't arrived, this was four weeks ago. I sent a reminder email to them asking for the money two weeks ago to which I had no response.

The company are selling several hundred images on thier site and seen has I have not been paid for my work the contract doesn't apply and they are breaking the law.

Do I now just compile screen dumps from thier site and send a bill for the images and damages. Also what to charge.

Many thanks in advance
 
If the contract that you signed was a normal event one then you can't bill for usage because you don't own the photographs.

It's not unusual to wait for a couple of weeks+ for payment of fees, especially if you negotiated day rate + commission/ %age.

You have their phone number don't you? Give them a call.
 
Evening all. It's said that there are no stupid questions, just stupid people. Well, allow me to embarrass myself!

I'm currently an amateur tog, and I've got an image that I've taken of a brand. Hypothetically, could I send a copy of the image to the company and enquire if they'd like to purchase reproduction rights of the image for them to use in their marketing, or would they first laugh at me, and secondly issue a court summons for attempting to sell an image of their copyrighted brand?
 
Nemesis said:
Evening all. It's said that there are no stupid questions, just stupid people. Well, allow me to embarrass myself!

I'm currently an amateur tog, and I've got an image that I've taken of a brand. Hypothetically, could I send a copy of the image to the company and enquire if they'd like to purchase reproduction rights of the image for them to use in their marketing, or would they first laugh at me, and secondly issue a court summons for attempting to sell an image of their copyrighted brand?
Click to expand...

Can anybody out there help?
 
Nemesis said:
Can anybody out there help?
Click to expand...

I don't *think* there would be a problem taking a photo of a brand, it happens a lot since the objects are in the wider world - just look on flickr to see lots of examples.

Go ahead and try sending your shots in but I suspect they won't be interested in paying you anything. Most marketing teams I've worked with commission the shots they want for a particular campaign and don't have much ad-hoc spending allowed.

Good luck though!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top