| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/05/2004 05:24:05 PM · #1 |
| I am a portrait photographer that was employed by another guy, and he and I were the only photographers. To make a long story short, he was intimidated by my work(He has no creativity, and he found a way to get rid of me. I have since opened my own studio tht is doing quite well, but this other guy still has my photos hanging in his studio. I am sure that he is passing them off as his work, but I do not want my work haning in there anymore. Does he have the right to display my work since it was shot when I was employed by him?? Sorry for the long question, but I would like him to remove my samples?? |
|
|
|
07/05/2004 05:45:58 PM · #2 |
| Nothing huh? I was just curious. I let my work speak for itself! |
|
|
|
07/05/2004 05:47:08 PM · #3 |
If you worked for him as an employee, that work was done as "work for hire" and he owns all the rights.
|
|
|
|
07/05/2004 05:50:26 PM · #4 |
| Thanks spaz....I figured that. Just didn't know? He is still even displaying pictures I took of my daughter. His new customers are in for a surprise when they get their work back and it has that Walmart feel.Hehehe! |
|
|
|
07/05/2004 05:54:12 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
If you worked for him as an employee, that work was done as "work for hire" and he owns all the rights. |
Not entirely sure if that is right
he may own the prints but intelectual property still rest with the artist
I think |
|
|
|
07/05/2004 05:58:00 PM · #6 |
| I was more or less just waondering if there was a way I could keep him from displaying it and passing it off as his? |
|
|
|
07/05/2004 06:00:40 PM · #7 |
Of course there is. It's intellectual theft. Ask that all your photographs have your name on them. If he refuses seek advice.
Ah. Just noticed you're American. Could be different rules on your side of the water! But... I don't think so.
Message edited by author 2004-07-05 18:03:34. |
|
|
|
07/05/2004 06:04:35 PM · #8 |
| I appreciate that Kev. I hadn't thought of it, but I just heard this weekend that he still had my work up in the studio and in the sample books. |
|
|
|
07/05/2004 08:49:04 PM · #9 |
He probably has the right to use/reproduce the photos under the "work for hire" provision of the copyright law. If, however, he uses those to advertise examples of his current work, implying that they are his own creations, he may be guilty of fraudulent or deceptive advertising.
That would come under the purview of your local District Attorney's office, and probably would require a complaint from a "dissatisfied client" and not from you ... the only "harm" (legally speaking) would be to future customers of the photographer, not to you ... |
|
|
|
07/05/2004 09:05:31 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
He probably has the right to use/reproduce the photos under the "work for hire" provision of the copyright law. If, however, he uses those to advertise examples of his current work, implying that they are his own creations, he may be guilty of fraudulent or deceptive advertising.
That would come under the purview of your local District Attorney's office, and probably would require a complaint from a "dissatisfied client" and not from you ... the only "harm" (legally speaking) would be to future customers of the photographer, not to you ... |
I should have been more clear, he owns the rights to any images you made while in his employ. In other words, anything you did while "on the clock" so to speak.
He can even use them as samples of the type of work that his business produces. If he were to claim them as the product of his own hand, he could be guilty of fraud, but the remedy would, as GeneralE already stated, be with a dissatisfied client, and not you.
I would suggest that you just walk away from it all and beware of "work for hire" situations in the future. Not that you should always avoid them, you jsut should know what you're getting into.
You could probably hire an attorney to draft a cease and desist letter, directing him to stop displaying your photos as his own, but I would expect that he could largely ignore it if he chose to.
Message edited by author 2004-07-05 21:06:36.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 11:34:50 PM · #11 |
If he passes them off as his own work, then he's in trouble...
If he passes them off as work of his company, then he is in the clear, just as long as he doesnt say or hint that the works are by a present empoloyee that will take the photos of a prospective client.
Due to the "master, sevant" rules of the UK and US he owns copyrights, as you were in his employee at the time, and (asumption) the photographs were taken on the employers time and expence.
IP is a much more iffy area... (just ask MS and Apple!!!!!!) You would be allowed to take photographs that are the same as the ones the ex employee has, as various rulings have said it would be impossible for someone not to use their memory.... but taking or copying of the original is not allowed, copying the concept, set up, and even the subject, of the original is allowed if the person doing so was material in the original.
In very laymans terms... IP and copyright are one in the same, and copyright in a master/servant (employemt) situation resides with the employer not employee. There are excpetions, but unless the finantial rewards far out weigh the cost of litigation... dont even go there.
I know that while employed as a programmer, a lot of my "works" are out there earning my old employees money... but that is life, the same holds true of any ex empoloyee of an ex employer.
The flip side is an ex employer cannot sue an ex employee for replicating (not copying or taking originals) his precious achievments. Hence the trash can and the recycle bin are not the same thing... (re: ms v Apple)
|
|
|
|
07/13/2004 12:33:08 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by parrothead:
Thanks spaz....I figured that. Just didn't know? He is still even displaying pictures I took of my daughter. His new customers are in for a surprise when they get their work back and it has that Walmart feel.Hehehe! |
He probably has the right to use the photos under work for hire/agency rules. However, if he doesn't have a written model release for that picutre of your daughter and it is being used to promote his business (i.e. for commercial purposes) I would certainly demand (as her guardian) that it be taken down immediately.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 02:36:26 PM EDT.
