Photographer Copyright - Advice Needed

Hi,

We're due to sign up for a photographer's services and my H2B brought up the issue of copyright. Can anyone advise whether the copyright/licensing section of the T&C's is ever amended to have the couple as owning the copyright, but giving the photographer permission to use the images in their promotional material, website, portfolio, etc.?  We're getting a high res CD with images as part of the package.

The current contract wording reads: Any images or copies of images whether stored digitally or otherwise and any computer program including any source or object code, computer files or printed documentation relating to such images are protected by the Copyright and Design Act 1988. It is contrary to the Act to copy or allow to be copied photographically/ electronically or by any other means an image created as part of this contract without the permission of the photographer/s in writing. Any breaking of seals in the viewing album will presume a breach of copyright.

My H2B suggested the wording be changed to read: This is a purchase of unlimited usage rights to all the original photographs created by <photographer> on <our wedding date>.   As the rightful owners of these photographs, <our names> may reproduce and re-distribute the photos as they see fit, and without restriction. <photographer> hereby surrenders all further claims to the intellectual property rights for theses photos with the exception of marketing and commercial usage.

Any help and advice would be much appreciated.

Thanks.

Don't 100% know the answer to your question but when we found our TOG one of the questions we was advised to ask her was who would own the copyright of the disc as I have heard if you don't then they can charge you for the copyright too.  Although don't quote me on this as i'm not 100% sure it's true.

Lucky for us though when I asked she did say the copyright would be ours and there would be no hidden cost for her to give us a disc with 800 edited photos on.

Hope this helps a little x 

MIL is a semi pro TOG, and I think I'm right in saying that whoever takes the photo owns it. End of. She makes calendars, and a photo I took was included (just a nice snap I took). I was given full written credit and copywright, as I had taken the photo.

I think that's the case, there are TOG's on here who will be along soon I'm sure......

I don't see why it's enough of a big deal to change the wording, TBH. It works beautifully for everyone else.......

A photographer (or the photographic company they work for) owns the copyright to all the photos they take, but they can sell you the copyright and draw up a document to hand them over. Not many togs like to do this, as if you own the copyright they must pay you to use the images.

Most togs will prepare you a disc with all the images on with permission to print reasonable copies for personal use and not for profit. So I think you need to negotiate with them for a disc and permissions - they're not going to be impressed if you ask to change the contract.

Our photographers retain copyright as it is their work, however we have a disc of hi-res images and a "licence to print". This means we can use the images for personal use like make our own albums, get canvas prints made etc. but couldn't submit the photos to a blog without their written permission or use them in any way to make money etc.

There is no reason why you need copyright, a licence to print should be enough?

If you are being given a disc of the images, make sure you have a licence to print. Copyright usually stays with the photographer as they created the photograph, but if you're given a licence to print, that allows you to print off your own photos, put them online, share with your family and friends etc. I don't think many photographs would agree to actually give full copyright over though but everyone's different.

Any photographer who gives up copyright in a sence will be leaving themselves open to an unlimited fine and 10 years in prison if they are found with any of the images that they gave up the copyright for. Most photographers (of if they understood the law should) keep hold of the copyright and gives away licences to print, reproduce and protect their backs.etc... and if they gave away the rights for all weddings then what are they left with, nothing... there whole business will in a sence be worthless to them.

If you are getting the files in high res and a licence to print then the contract wont affect you and theres not alot of point in fighting it. how are they going to know how what you do with them in the end of the day.

This method also protects against facebook, myspace and any other social network sites who have in there terms and conditions that upon uploading a file you are giving up all rights to that social network site. - It has been known for a particular social network site to sell off 10000 images to other companies-

Mrs C:

Our photographers retain copyright as it is their work, however we have a disc of hi-res images and a "licence to print". This means we can use the images for personal use like make our own albums, get canvas prints made etc. but couldn't submit the photos to a blog without their written permission or use them in any way to make money etc.

 

There is no reason why you need copyright, a licence to print should be enough?

 

Mrs C did they give you a letter to this effect? I.e if you wanted to get a picture printed in a shop you would just show the letter

Lil Miss Red:

Mrs C:

Our photographers retain copyright as it is their work, however we have a disc of hi-res images and a "licence to print". This means we can use the images for personal use like make our own albums, get canvas prints made etc. but couldn't submit the photos to a blog without their written permission or use them in any way to make money etc.

There is no reason why you need copyright, a licence to print should be enough?

Mrs C did they give you a letter to this effect? I.e if you wanted to get a picture printed in a shop you would just show the letter

It was written in the contract.

If you upload photos to a print site you are generally asked to tick a box to say that you have the rights to the photos. Obviously you could lie but if caught you would be in serious bother.

Thanks for all the responses so far

Regarding the license to print, I understand that will be a given if we are provided a CD with high res images, however what would happen if we wanted to create a personal/family website using some of the wedding images as well as other family photos?  If this was in 5 years time, would we then need to contact said photographer and ask their permission or would we be liable if we went ahead and created the site anyway?

My H2B gave an example of using free website creation templates that then advertise on your space... Would this be classed as commercial as opposed to personal use even if we set-up the site as a personal web space for our family and friends to view?

The photographer is happy for the images to be used on social networking media such as Facebook, Twitter, etc. as this in essence is additional advertising for him as I would definitely credit any photos he took.  This copyright thing is not about being mean or selfish, but pre-empting what could happen in the future as we're totally unaware when it comes to the laws that cover photography.

Mrs C:

Lil Miss Red:

 

Mrs C:

 

Our photographers retain copyright as it is their work, however we have a disc of hi-res images and a "licence to print". This means we can use the images for personal use like make our own albums, get canvas prints made etc. but couldn't submit the photos to a blog without their written permission or use them in any way to make money etc.

 

There is no reason why you need copyright, a licence to print should be enough?

 

 

Mrs C did they give you a letter to this effect? I.e if you wanted to get a picture printed in a shop you would just show the letter

 

 

It was written in the contract.

 

If you upload photos to a print site you are generally asked to tick a box to say that you have the rights to the photos. Obviously you could lie but if caught you would be in serious bother.

 

Ok, thanks. I guess in a shop you would just take your contract. I ask as I went to put a picture on a cake once and they wouldnt do it a they said it was a professional pic (it wasnt just take on my DSLR camera) and because I couldnt prove that I had the rights to the picture they wouldnt put the pic on

Hi all.

I work for a publishers and I deal a lot with usage rights and copyright licencing.

It virtually unheard of for a photographer to surrender the copyright without invoicing a LOT higher rate. Usually 3 or 4 times as much, 10 times the rate is not unheard of.

With the exception of a few rare specialist circumstances there is no reason to obtain copyright. As standard all you need is a 'usage rights agreement' and as long as the usage rights agreement covers your required usage, such as printing or putting them on your website, or whatever else you require then all is fine and you don't need the copyright.

We'll often licence images on an 'exclusive' basis, but again this is not copyright.
(its very unlikely you'll need to worry about this for wedding photos)

Transferring of copyright is so rare, without a huge payment, that if a photographer offers it to us, we often assume that they do not know what they are doing, are a complete amateur and simply refuse to deal with them. Same as we won't deal with amateurs who offer un-colour calibrated images or un post processed photos.

If you actually ask most amateurs about image rights / licencing / post processing and colour calibration most have no idea what you are talking about or try to bluff their way through telling you that don't need them.

We offer personal reproduction rights, so as long as the images are for personal use thats fine by me.

I would ba happy for them to be on a blog, or a website, so long as it was a personal website. But if you were using that website commercially, then using them on that website would be in breach of our contract.

I would ask if you are unsure and explain what you are doing or get them to define "personal use" For what you are after i think that you should be fine. If he is happy for you to use them on facebook then your personal site is just a step across from that as facebook does advertise other companies.

As long as on the site "you" didnt advertise any form of creative media - "photography, Video, Creative design"

Thanks again for the advice...

In terms of a personal use website, it would be something for family and friends to access with no commercial use from our side nor any advertising of creative or photographic services from us either.  My brother has a site that he setup via a paid for site creation service that features both his and his wife's family trees, photos of the various important people (family and friends) and special events in their lives, e.g. wedding, birth of babies, landmark birthdays, etc.  It's password protected so only family or friends with the password can access it and is a nice visual update for friends and family who are located world-wide.

I'll be discussing all the advice this evening with H2B and am hopeful we can get this resolved before the end of the week and get a tick in the box for the photographer part of the wedding planning!

After reading a lot of advice and information on the forums before, I'm so glad I joined up today