| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/03/2008 01:31:33 PM · #1 |
| When a photographer gets paid for a photo shoot as an independent contractor with no written contract, what rights does the person who paid the photographer have to the photos. Is it a license? Do you know of any online resources that explain how this works? |
|
|
|
06/03/2008 01:36:05 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by rider808:
When a photographer gets paid for a photo shoot as an independent contractor with no written contract, what rights does the person who paid the photographer have to the photos. Is it a license? Do you know of any online resources that explain how this works? |
Someone cited the other day that unless there is a contract specifically GIVING the client the rights to the photos, then the photos by default belong to the photographer. At least in the USA.
You might still have model release issues, however, if there are people in them and not journalistic.
Message edited by author 2008-06-03 13:36:40.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2008 01:36:14 PM · #3 |
Whatever the court believes you agreed to in your verbal contract.
ETA: Copyright in 'works for hire' are owned by the payer, so it would depend on whether a jury believed you were hired to provide a license to use photos, or as a photographer.
~Terry
Message edited by author 2008-06-03 13:42:01.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2008 01:44:59 PM · #4 |
| I understand that with no contract, I retain the rights to the images, but what rights do the clients that paid me have to use the images? And do you know of any online resources that have information about this. Any help is appreciated. |
|
|
|
06/03/2008 02:10:59 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by rider808:
I understand that with no contract, I retain the rights to the images, but what rights do the clients that paid me have to use the images? And do you know of any online resources that have information about this. Any help is appreciated. |
If you produce a photograph, the default rule is that you own the copyright in that photograph, and no on else has any rights in them at all (ignoring, for the moment, the fair use rights which the public gets for free).
If someone pays you to produce photographs, they are obviously expecting something in return. There is no default definition of what that something is - be it prints, electronic copies, a license (and even then, what rights are granted by that license), or full title to the photographs. It all comes down to what a court believes you and your customer agreed you would provide in exchange for his payment.
This is really a conversation you need to have with your customer.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
06/03/2008 02:50:58 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by rider808:
I understand that with no contract, I retain the rights to the images, but what rights do the clients that paid me have to use the images? And do you know of any online resources that have information about this. Any help is appreciated. |
No. If you do not have a written contract, you may or may not have rights to the images your client hired to to make. If it comes down to it, the court will decide if they were "works for hire" or not. If the court decides they were, you have NO rights to those images at all.
In short, if you're engaging in paid work, you're a fool to not have a written contract. |
|
|
|
06/03/2008 04:01:21 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by rider808:
I understand that with no contract, I retain the rights to the images, but what rights do the clients that paid me have to use the images? And do you know of any online resources that have information about this. Any help is appreciated. |
No. If you do not have a written contract, you may or may not have rights to the images your client hired to to make. If it comes down to it, the court will decide if they were "works for hire" or not. If the court decides they were, you have NO rights to those images at all.
In short, if you're engaging in paid work, you're a fool to not have a written contract. |
I haven't seen a case of work for hire being disputed in the absence of a written contract or agreement. If it's not in writing, then I wouldn't worry about it being a work for hire.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2008 04:09:24 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by virtuamike:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by rider808:
I understand that with no contract, I retain the rights to the images, but what rights do the clients that paid me have to use the images? And do you know of any online resources that have information about this. Any help is appreciated. |
No. If you do not have a written contract, you may or may not have rights to the images your client hired to to make. If it comes down to it, the court will decide if they were "works for hire" or not. If the court decides they were, you have NO rights to those images at all.
In short, if you're engaging in paid work, you're a fool to not have a written contract. |
I haven't seen a case of work for hire being disputed in the absence of a written contract or agreement. If it's not in writing, then I wouldn't worry about it being a work for hire. |
Then don't, but even if you're not worried about that, there are far too many pitfalls to not work without a written agreement and you're a fool if you don't.
Message edited by author 2008-06-03 16:10:13. |
|
|
|
06/03/2008 09:30:42 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by virtuamike:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by rider808:
I understand that with no contract, I retain the rights to the images, but what rights do the clients that paid me have to use the images? And do you know of any online resources that have information about this. Any help is appreciated. |
No. If you do not have a written contract, you may or may not have rights to the images your client hired to to make. If it comes down to it, the court will decide if they were "works for hire" or not. If the court decides they were, you have NO rights to those images at all.
In short, if you're engaging in paid work, you're a fool to not have a written contract. |
I haven't seen a case of work for hire being disputed in the absence of a written contract or agreement. If it's not in writing, then I wouldn't worry about it being a work for hire. |
Then don't, but even if you're not worried about that, there are far too many pitfalls to not work without a written agreement and you're a fool if you don't. |
I never said anything for or against working without a written agreement. But in the absence of one, I've never seen a case of it being disputed as a work of hire.
Work for hire is specifically defined. It shouldn't have entered into this discussion.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2008 09:47:03 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by virtuamike:
It shouldn't have entered into this discussion. |
Yes SIR!
Of course someone died and made you the arbiter of what should and should not be discussed maybe you should have one of your peons make an announcement.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2008 10:47:45 PM · #11 |
ok...if this is a work for hire situation the client would own full rights to the photographs taken. Independent Contractor is not a good definition to determine if it was work for hire. An independent contractor is someone hired to do a job that is not an employee, they are also responsible for their own taxes. Hence all photographers are independent contractors.
If you were hired as a contracted photographer and it was not work for hire you own the rights to the photos and can provide them a usage license.
Perhaps if we have more information about the specific situation we would be better able to answer your question.
Try the website for US Copyright
Message edited by author 2008-06-03 22:50:23. |
|
|
|
06/03/2008 10:53:58 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by virtuamike:
It shouldn't have entered into this discussion. |
Yes SIR!
Of course someone died and made you the arbiter of what should and should not be discussed maybe you should have one of your peons make an announcement. |
My peons have more important things to tend to, like rubbing my feet and brewing my beer.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2008 10:46:49 AM · #13 |
Might also want to check out
//www.photoattorney.com/
|
|
|
|
06/04/2008 10:16:40 PM · #14 |
| well thanks for all of the responses. Here is the situation. I take photos and virtual tours for a real estate company in my town. The company and I have no problems, however they are in a dispute with their previous photographer. They hired him (not as an employee of the company but as an independent contractor) to take photos and virtual tours. There was never a written agreement, and not much of a verbal agreement other than something like "Ill take the photos and you can use them." There was no mention of hosting for the virtual tours. He has been hosting the tours for 4 years or so without charging a hosting fee. He recently called the company and told them they owed $5000 for 3 years of back hosting, and when they refused to pay he, took the tours off line. Because the real estate company paid the photographer to take the virtual tours for their use with their listings, can we legally make him give the tours to the real estate company to be hosted by them. There is plenty of proof that he was paid tens of thousands of dollars over the years to take the virtual tours. Any answers would be greatly appreciated. More importantly, any links with information regarding this sort of situation would be even more helpful. Thanks |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 07:57:21 AM EDT.
