Modeling Site for Models Photographers Agents MUA
Feedback: Who Owns Your Photo's
This forum topic is in response to the blog we recently posted regarding the ownership of photos.
If anyone has anything to add, we'd love to hear about it in here.
If anyone has anything to add, we'd love to hear about it in here.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Sheena on -
thank you for that. nothing to add but happy someone took the time to write the post
-
Permalink Reply by Fotographia Fantastique on -
This is like photography 101.
Don't know why this merited a mass mailing.
-
Permalink Reply by The Wizard. on -
Fotographia Fantastique: there are plenty of models and photogs who aren't aware of the rules. thought it would be helpful, but maybe not worthy of an blast mail. thanks for the comment
-
Permalink Reply by Rebel Photo on -
Has it been determined that on-line portfolios are "Publishing"? As far as I know it has not and is considered no different that a hard copy portfolio. Secondly, model releases are not required for limited reproductions as works of art - under 300. A model release is only required when the image is used to endorse a company or product and the model is recognizable. (this may not true for some states like California, for example. Check your own state privacy laws, or the state you may be working in.)
The photographer also owns the model release, not the model. It is up to the model to obtain a copy. Model releases, contracts and such, should be separate and individual documents. It they are combined and the contract is found void by a court of law, the model release also may be null and void.
-
Permalink Reply by The Wizard. on
-
thanks for the comment..good point about the release...as far as i know, on-line portfolio's are not "Publishing."
-
Permalink Reply by cnphoto on
-
It is my understanding that the photographer, from the click of the shutter owens the photograph. A release is only needed for published work where the subject is recognizable. The model never owens the photograph but may use it with permission from the photographer. Other cutomers never really own the rights to the photographs...
-
Permalink Reply by The Wizard. on
-
i think you're right about recognizable people. there are different rules if the person is a public figure. but a release is needed for the photog to use the photo's in a non-editorial commercial way (or thats what i've been reading).
-
Permalink Reply by robert breisch on -
Good subject...
In my art classes to get my AFA in Graphic Design & Journalism-we had an attorney come to class and discuss copyright laws
and it was very interesting. As I do lots of illustrations of both my own and others work -my understanding is that unless there is a formal written document-a hard copy-that ownership of any image can be hard to prove in court-its a he said-she said contest.
As an illustrator if you make a 15% change to your subject or greater-then you are protected from copyright violations-if any issue arises about ownership. So-if the model has an agreement that they can use the image as they feel fit-and authorize myself to use it-I am free to do so.
Learning this was a great relief.
As far as taking any image off the internet without permissions-its copyright violation time...Having been carried away with myself in the past I have confused models with ones I had permissions to use with ones that looked very similar-so-even a person like myself that is knowledable (?) of the laws can screw up.In this case I received a polite but stern warning from both the model & photographer.I apolodized and removed all the images and erased them from my computer.
If your work is registered and used without your permission-the fines can be up to $50,k a pop.
If you are just an unregistered photographer or model-and your rights are violated in a similar manner the fines can go to just $15,k.
So-
when one sticks ones foot into ones mouth or elsewhere its best to apologize profusely-and sya by destroying any image anywhere you may have placed it.
Since I offer my services to models here for free-on a shared use permission basis-I'm really careful-I get multiple copies of permissions and save them on computer and disc.
The only complaint I havehad yet from any photographer was that he did not want my f'ing opinion about his lack of abilty with flash or studio lighting..and after I used photoshop adjustments it was balanced and he asked how I did it.
From that point in time he has not complained.
Best bet is to check the us copyright office and ask for or read it at their homepage.
Rob
Most pros keep the images and only sell the prints.
To me-I feel its a bit of a scam-its like baiting someone touse your serice.
Though I'm new to selling & marketing-as I have never really cared about the $ thing-terrible marketing...
I prefer to charge a one time fee and the model walks with images in her or his hands-I keep a master copy-and share rights with the model-We each can use our images as we please.
-
Permalink Reply by robert breisch on
-
heres what the Gov' says about copyright....
Copyright in General
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is copyright?
Copyright is a form of protection grounded in the U.S. Constitution and granted by law for original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright covers both published and unpublished works.
What does copyright protect?
Copyright, a form of intellectual property law, protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture. Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section "What Works Are Protected."
How is a copyright different from a patent or a trademark?
Copyright protects original works of authorship, while a patent protects inventions or discoveries. Ideas and discoveries are not protected by the copyright law, although the way in which they are expressed may be. A trademark protects words, phrases, symbols, or designs identifying the source of the goods or services of one party and distinguishing them from those of others.
When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.
Do I have to register with your office to be protected?
No. In general, registration is voluntary. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created. You will have to register, however, if you wish to bring a lawsuit for infringement of a U.S. work. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section “Copyright Registration.”
Why should I register my work if copyright protection is automatic?
Registration is recommended for a number of reasons. Many choose to register their works because they wish to have the facts of their copyright on the public record and have a certificate of registration. Registered works may be eligible for statutory damages and attorney's fees in successful litigation. Finally, if registration occurs within 5 years of publication, it is considered prima facie evidence in a court of law. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section “Copyright Registration” and Circular 38b, Highlights of Copyright Amendments Contained in the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), on non-U.S. works.
I’ve heard about a “poor man’s copyright.” What is it?
The practice of sending a copy of your own work to yourself is sometimes called a “poor man’s copyright.” There is no provision in the copyright law regarding any such type of protection, and it is not a substitute for registration.
Is my copyright good in other countries?
The United States has copyright relations with most countries throughout the world, and as a result of these agreements, we honor each other's citizens' copyrights. However, the United States does not have such copyright relationships with every country. For a listing of countries and the nature of their copyright relations with the United States, see Circular 38a, International Copyright Relations of the United States.
Note: The Copyright Office offers introductory answers to frequently asked questions about copyright, registration, and services of the Office. Links throughout the answers will guide you to further information on our website or from other sources. For any other questions, please visit our Contact Us page.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home | Contact Us | Legal Notices | Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) | Library of Congress
U.S. Copyright Office
101 Independence Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20559-6000
(202) 707-3000
Revised: 12-Jul-2006
-
Permalink Reply by robert breisch on
-
And Fini :>)
Complications can get nasty in section B as to whom owns the images....
Chapter 2
Copyright Ownership and Transfer
201. Ownership of copyright
202. Ownership of copyright as distinct from ownership of material object
203. Termination of transfers and licenses granted by the author
204. Execution of transfers of copyright ownership
205. Recordation of transfers and other documents
§ 201. Ownership of copyright1
(a) Initial Ownership. — Copyright in a work protected under this title vests initially in the author or authors of the work. The authors of a joint work are coowners of copyright in the work.
(b) Works Made for Hire. — In the case of a work made for hire, the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author for purposes of this title, and, unless the parties have expressly agreed otherwise in a written instrument signed by them, owns all of the rights comprised in the copyright.
(c) Contributions to Collective Works. — Copyright in each separate contribution to a collective work is distinct from copyright in the collective work as a whole, and vests initially in the author of the contribution. In the absence of an express transfer of the copyright or of any rights under it, the owner of copyright in the collective work is presumed to have acquired only the privilege of reproducing and distributing the contribution as part of that particular collective work, any revision of that collective work, and any later collective work in the same series.
(d) Transfer of Ownership. —
(1) The ownership of a copyright may be transferred in whole or in part by any means of conveyance or by operation of law, and may be bequeathed by will or pass as personal property by the applicable laws of intestate succession.
(2) Any of the exclusive rights comprised in a copyright, including any subdivision of any of the rights specified by section 106, may be transferred as provided by clause (1) and owned separately. The owner of any particular exclusive right is entitled, to the extent of that right, to all of the protection and remedies accorded to the copyright owner by this title.
(e) Involuntary Transfer. — When an individual author's ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, has not previously been transferred voluntarily by that individual author, no action by any governmental body or other official or organization purporting to seize, expropriate, transfer, or exercise rights of ownership with respect to the copyright, or any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, shall be given effect under this title, except as provided under title 11.2
§ 202. Ownership of copyright as distinct from ownership of material object
Ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, is distinct from ownership of any material object in which the work is embodied. Transfer of ownership of any material object, including the copy or phonorecord in which the work is first fixed, does not of itself convey any rights in the copyrighted work embodied in the object; nor, in the absence of an agreement, does transfer of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive rights under a copyright convey property rights in any material object.
-
Permalink Reply by Kimberly Dawn on -
anything on "implied consent"?
or if a persons face is not shown in the image?
-
Permalink Reply by robert breisch on
-
you may have to look the entire copyright laws up and see if you can find it-but implied consent is meaningless in any contract.If its not in writing-you have only a promise-not a contract.
Sign in
Follow us
| Friends
|
Info
|
Members
|
Photographers
|
Models
|
Add Us
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
