Can copyright to a photograph belong to both?

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

05/24/2006 04:53:23 AM · #1

Me and my wife often make set-up, take pictures, and often share a common camera. Although we store pictures in seperate folders, many a times it may not be possible. It has so happened that sometimes we have sent Photographs to a magazine, realising later on that they actually belonged to the other, or both of us.
Can both of us share the Copyright to an image?
Can one of us transfer copyright of an image to another?

David.C

05/24/2006 05:02:52 AM · #2

yes and yes.

If you camera allows for a user comment field to be added, you might consider adding 'Â© Mr & Mrs ...'. That way anything taken would belong to both. Otherwise, a copyright is the same as any other possession, it can be transfered, sold, given away, borrowed, etc. All it takes is one agreement, as formally as you care to make it, that either of you may act as the copyright holder of any images taken with that camera and it is so for all images.

David

Matthew

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

05/24/2006 07:27:13 AM · #3

Copyright is intellectual property. There are a number of tweaks to the way in which you own intellectual property, compared to normal property.

Technically, in the normal course, the photographer in any case would own the copyright created when taking a photograph. The photographer could agree that the other person may deal with the copyright in his or her photograph. That agreement can be tacit (it does not, for example, have to be in writing) or established through a course of conduct. If the agreement between you extends to allowing the other to send photographs to a magazine and not worrying about correct accreditation, to license use of the image, or even to sell the copyright, then that is probably effective.

There are some inalienable rights that would remain with the photographer regardless (so called moral rights). These probably do reside with the original photographer (though as a matter of fact you may not be sure which of you this is).

It is not clear why you are concerned about the issue - if there is a complication, that may affect the position.

Message edited by author 2006-05-24 07:28:17.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

05/24/2006 09:39:12 PM · #4

There is only one complication. Suppose, my wife has sent a particular photograph to a magazine, which gets published. Can I send the same to some other forum/publication, if the copyright belongs to us both? I am sure readers of the magazine may raise (unnecessary) doubts on our credibility, not knowing the real story.
Am I getting a little too apprehensive??

David.C

05/24/2006 11:28:32 PM · #5

Granting rights to one magazine need not limit your ability to grant rights to another -- that is, unless the rights granted are exclusive in some way. If they are exclusive, you need to make sure the exclusivity (is that a word?) is as narrow as possible so you retain as much control as possible -- and, make certain to keep track of what exclusive rights have been granted for each image. This is called 'Rights Management' and you'll hear more about it if you get involved in the better stock photography sites.

If the license granted the magazine was not exclusive, there in no limitation on what you can do with it. The contract agreed to when the image was licensed will spell out what limitations they have on the use of the image as well as what limitations you are agreeing to have to your rights on that image. The exact nature of these limitations can be anything up to and including they have unlimited use and you have little or none (such as when you sell the image outright or work for hire).

Just another couple of pennies from someone who's images have never been good enough to have to worry about it. :P

---

Now, if what your wanting to know is if you have to abide by the limitations of a license contract with a magazine your wife agreed to with one of your photos -- no, you don't have to if you can prove it is your image. However, this would almost certainly not be worth it when considering the trouble it would place your wife in with the magazine. If indeed such a situation ever arises.

David

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/24/2006 11:34:16 PM · #6

Note that most people commenting here are probably most familiar with US Copyright law, not that which applies in India -- your situation may be different. In some states in the US, anything created/acquired by one member of a marriage is automatically owned by both ("community property") while in other states it may remain thier separate property.

In general, you should always license the use of a photo, not "sell" it -- then, the terms of use (exclusivity and whatnot) should be spelled-out (in writing) in the licening agreement before you deliver the goods.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

05/25/2006 03:13:54 AM · #7

In India, we don't get paid anything by Photography magazines. And there are no limitations imposed as such. It is only that we contribute images, and they get published (provided they are worthy of it).
I do not know what the Indian Copyright law interprets, but the society here is more tolerant.
There is least chance of my wife sueing me, or vice-versa! LOL.

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

05/25/2006 03:23:10 AM · #8

LOL - Sorry, I was just reading along and got a chuckle out of thinking of my portfolio as "Intellectual Property" :)

Matthew

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

05/25/2006 04:33:12 AM · #9

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Note that most people commenting here are probably most familiar with US Copyright law, not that which applies in India -- your situation may be different.

I agree in part: the details may differ, but given that India is a member of the Berne Convention and WIPO, the substance of the law will be broadly similar.

Originally posted by kbhatia1967:

I am sure readers of the magazine may raise (unnecessary) doubts on our credibility, not knowing the real story.
Am I getting a little too apprehensive??

The issue does not sound like a legal one: your primary concern appears to be whether the accreditation you use will raise suspicion. The suggestion that for this photograph you credit both you and your wife would appear to be a good one!

Matthew

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

05/25/2006 04:41:52 AM · #10

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

LOL - Sorry, I was just reading along and got a chuckle out of thinking of my portfolio as "Intellectual Property" :)

In the UK, the legislation explicitly states that copyright applies to all photographs "irrespective of artistic quality". This clarification is helpful to some of us more than others...

hankk

Canon EOS-5D

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

05/25/2006 11:27:30 AM · #11

AFIK, in the US, only one "person" can own a copyright. A corporation is considered a "legal person". I don't think a husband and wife are considered one "person" for copyright purposes, so you cannot both own an image unless you form a legal entity (corporation or partnership) and both assign your copyrights to it.

However, a copyright can be assigned, so yes, one of you can assign all copyrights to the other.

Artifacts

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

05/25/2006 12:11:12 PM · #12

Originally posted by kbhatia1967:

You will find out for sure after the divorce. ;)

David.C

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

05/25/2006 05:20:16 PM · #13

Originally posted by hankk:

Isn't a marraige a legal entity? With the agreement to share all they have with the other?

05/26/2006 03:36:29 AM · #14

Originally posted by stdavidson:

You will find out for sure after the divorce. ;)

LOL.