Who retains the rights onboard cruise liners?

<p>Hi there,<br>

I have a question for those of you who have worked as photographers onboard cruise ships recently.<br>

I am contemplating applying for a position on board an Australian P&O Cruise ship as a ship photographer. I am at the point where I am almost convinced, however there is one factor that will determine my decision; that being the issue of who retains the rights to my images. My assumption is that the cruise company will want all rights, but I would like to give them the benefit of the doubt.<br>

Also what is the money like? I really have no idea what I would be earning if I went through with it.<br>

Thanks in advance for your help.</p>

<p>Kiti, this is something you need to discuss with the cruise line (as well as the pay!), but basically, if you are shooting in the capacity of employment as a photographer, the rights belong to them. This is especially true if you're using equipment furnished by the ship. Off duty and using your own gear, the rights are yours. If you're using your own equipment on the job, you can probably work out some kind of arrangement with the cruise line regardin rights. But, again, talk to them.....</p>

<p>Look up "work for hire" (Wicki at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_for_hire">link</a> ). The conditions are sometimes "permeable" so it is not always easy to tell exactly what is what. Your moral right to be identified as the photographer is somewhat separate from the ownership of pictures done while you are an employee of the company.</p>

<p>Who owns copyright depends on your contract. You have to read it to find out. If you are a salaried staff employee who's job it is to take photographs, then likely the cruise line will own copyright by default. If you're an independant contractor you would own copyright by default.</p>

<p>However to save yourself a lot of headaches, get the situation explicity stated in your employment contract. Then there can be no arguments "after the fact"</p>

<p>If you're an employee, the emplyer typically owns the images; HOWEVER, note that most cruise images are taken in international waters, so I doubt that any USA laws would prevail.</p>

<p>Like any other work for hire situation, this is determined entirely by your contract with the company. Whose equipment is used has nothing to do with it. Beyond that, the photos a cruise ship photographer takes while on the job are mostly grip and grins, table shots and formal portaits -- images there would be no point in having the rights to since there's going to be little if any opportunity for a sale beyond what the passengers have already bought while on board. I've never worked on a cruise ship but have taken a number of cruises and spent some time talking to staff about their working conditions. Generally speaking, cruise ships are run with a military-like chain of command not just for the naval staff but the "hotel" staff as well. Working morning to night all week with maybe half a day off is common, as is working making six months straight with a couple of weeks or a month off for vacation. Probably a little better for the photographers compared say to waiters. On my latest cruise, photographers were shooting people coming on board at the beginning, shooting table shots at dinner, shooting formal family portaits before and after dinner, shooting various other events through the day and manning the counter in the photo store (where the pictures were sold) the rest of the time, and presumably working in the digital darkroom to print the photos in between. My impression is that cruise ship pay is low. Most crew are from very low-wage countries and seem to be working ships because it pays more than they can make at home and are sending money home to their families. Not a lot of off-duty time to go ashore and shoot for yourself, not a lot of time to enjoy the destinations, not a lot of time to relax.</p>

<p>Indeed, "<strong>Work for Hire</strong>" generally means you have rights to nothing except getting paid. I said generally because contracts, licenses can be written/adjusted/modified as needed as long as all parties involved are satisfied.</p>

<p>It appears you are not willing to "Work for Hire"<br>

So why not counter with "freelance"?</p>

<p>I fear another problem you will have is contractual complexity if you "Freelance"<br>

The "Hold Harmless" and dual "Indemnification" clauses will be unwieldy at best.</p>

<p>Working for hire is always tilted in favor of the company. In this case, I see the cruise ship's reasoning.<br>

If you are hurt while on board etc..at least you are covered..or should be. Thescenario of freelancing places the cruise ship company at great risk unless you arewilling to sign a waiver. (See Indemnification) </p>

<p><strong>My question for you is "Why do you care who retains the rights?"</strong><br>

<strong></strong><br>

It appears you may have a opportunity here to build a resume' unless you are already a world renown photographer...AND, get to see some of the world at the same time.<br>

It is bad to allow legal concerns to drive your business model; if you have one.<br>

The two are seperate from one another and should be treated as such.<br>

Risk/Reward</p>

<p>As a studio owner for many years, these scenarios always amaze me. I assume all responsibility for renting and maintaining a studio location, bringing in business, owning and maintaining equipment and making sure my employees get paid every week whether I'm making money or not. I assume ALL the risk. Then someone comes in to apply for a position with a guaranteed weekly salary and wants rights to the images so they can compete against me? Not going to happen in my contracts....-Aimee</p>

<p>Aimee,</p>

<p>I'd give them the rights; if they wanted to pay for the license. ;)<br>

Ka'Ching!</p>

<p>Thank you for help.</p>

<p>You all have valid points and I feel very informed about what to expect. I will be discussing these issues further with the cruise company before I make any decisions.</p>

<p>There are a few points which came up throughout the thread I would like to adress:<br>

1. It is my right as the photographer to be acknowledged, this is something I should not have to ask for. <br>

2. I would much like to keep the rights to my Images.</p>

<p>If a designer designs a dress; they allow the dress to be sold in different countries all over the world. They don't sell the design of the dress, they sell the rights to reproduce it.</p>

<p>This is my stance on copyright and why I am thinking things through as much as I am.<br>

I feel very strongly about my rights and will ensure I look over my contract with a fine tooth comb.<br>

Thanks again</p>

<p>Kiti,<br>

This has a lot to do with who is in the driver's seat. In other words, do they to hire you more than you want the job or is it the other way around?<br>

If you're as famous as an international dress designer and have the credentials to prove it, then go for it. However; from your initial post and what others have said, this is very much "bread and butter" photography. The cruise ship companies are all about keeping everything consistent and their guidelines and instructions about what and how you shoot are very rigid.<br>

It sounds to me like you will be better off working for yourself and building your own name....-Aimee</p>

<p>I think your right Aimee,<br>

Its the opportunity of travel that pulls me in, but im not willing to take photographs for $8 an hour 15 hours a day so that P&O can use my images in their million dollar advertising campaigns.<br>

There are plenty of other people out there as sad enough as it sounds willing to do that.</p>

 

<p>I hope you understand that on the high seas you will be competing against photographers from countries with a lot lower standard of living and wages. $8Aus an hour is way above what the cruise ship pays. Servers and room attendants get tips, never the photogs.<br>

What make cruising a bragain as oppsed to travelling in level one countries is the low cost of the hired help who are easily replaced withsomeone who can do the job just as well. <br>

If the post at 5:37 is your stance then don't waste your time with cruise ships. Sure you get to travel but will you actually have time to really "travel".<br>

There are better ways to get opportunities for real travel and do photography your way.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>1. It is my right as the photographer to be acknowledged, this is something I should not have to ask for. <br />2. I would much like to keep the rights to my Images.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Ok Kiti..Hardball time.</p>

<p>1)It is NOT your right to ask or expect anything beyond what is contracted for.</p>

<p>2) You want to keep the rights? Stay well clear of "Work for Hire" I seriously doubt in this situation they will grant that.<br>

You can always ask and then include it in your contractual agreement.</p>

 

<p><em></em><br>

A right to be acknowledged?</p>

<p>That's a new one.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If a designer designs a dress; they allow the dress to be sold in different countries all over the world. They don't sell the design of the dress, they sell the rights to reproduce it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My first wife designed for Ralph Lauren. They owned the designs and she got guaranteed payment and benefits. That's what you should expect as a cruise liner photographer.</p>

<p><em>most cruise images are taken in international waters, so I doubt that any USA laws would prevail.</em><br>

<em></em><br>

Aimee, have you thought about the possibility that contracts and employment arrangements made in the U.S. can and are made for activity that takes place outside of the U.S.? Would you agree with your statement if you were contracted here to shoot a destination wedding on the seas or elsewhere and then were told by the client that the images are now their's because merely because the images were "taken in international waters"?</p>

<p>The photographers on cruise ships who do the day to day to day photos of the passengers are probably not the ones who do the photography for the cruise line publicity. Taking shots of several thousand passengers at each port of call, at all fancy events, etc., could be a time consuming job with not much time for the fancy stuff. </p>

<p>I assume their PR shots are well set up, in sunny weather, calm seas, prefect ship areas, etc. Maybe that's the job you should aspire to?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have found that probably the most unpleasant experience of a Cruise Ship vacation is the aggressive photographers sticking camera's in your face continually. The thought that they may then have the rights to those pictures and plaster them onto the web is not something I have considered. Good luck on your interview and thanks for the thread.</p>

<p>Kiit, I've hung around with cruise ship photographers and watched them work and I think you completely, totally misunderstand the job. This is absolute grunt work photography, something around the level of shooting school pictures at an elementary school or the "portrait studio" at the mall where non-photographers are hired at minimum wage and taught to operate the camera. If you worked on a cruise ship, you might want to keep a dozen shots as examples of your work for when you apply for your next job or start your own studio back home. But you would be making the same half dozen shots over and over and over again, just with different people standing in front of the camera. And Bob is correct -- advertising photographers are brought in to do the ad campaign shots, not the grip-and-grin grunts who do the daily shots of passengers. It's not that cruise photographers aren't good photographers when they go out to shoot for themselves, it's just that their job on the ship is extremely routine and their bosses want consistency, not creativity. I agree with you in principle on rights and acknowledgement if you're talking about fine art photography, editorial photography, maybe fashion. But even in big time advertising photography the photographer is often anonymous, and there's a whole range of rights and licensing situations depending on what kind of photography you do for a living. Cruise photography is just inherently a take-it-or-leave-it situation where if you don't want to work they way they want you to work that's fine because there are plenty of other people dying for the chance.</p>

<p>I don't think there are any legal questions whatsoever. You sign an employment contract. It's going to be enforceable under the terms of the contract. The contract may specify the country applicable, perhaps the that of the country of the company owning the line. Maybe the country the ship is flagged under. In any event, the terms will be clear and enforceable. There are international laws and treaties governing the employment of ship crews, etc. I'd expect there is not going to be any issue (or loophole) about "ownership" of the images.</p>

<p>Kiti, years ago I had worked for cruiseline as a photographer, I did only one contract. I do hope you know exactly what you are getting yourself into: it's a Disney/Macdonalds type of work. We use to get only commisssion which was not much. Nowadays, I hear some do pay wages, but I don't think it's a lot.<br>

Rights to images? If you are talking about images taken during your work hours, of the passengers, cruiselines usually sell them online even after the passengers went home. So no, they will probably not give you rights for those. We had to sign that we will not take any pics of the working conditions onboard - it was because terrorism they say, but I think there are some other reasons as well ;)<br>

It's a very very hard job, you need to be very intrusive and work a lot of hours - I did 18 h many times.<br>

I didn't make much money, but I was younger, had a very fun team (esp the Scottish manager) and seen awesome places. Took a lot of pics of wonderful things that I cannot sell;)!<br>

Get all the info you can, esp about which ship and what route you would be doing, 'cause thats what matters (moneywise).<br>

Good luck.</p>

<p>Kiti, I am curious about your background and upbringing, you seem to have a warped sense of entitlement, based on your #1 and #2 points that others have commented about. I haven't seen this level of gall since the height of the dotbomb business in 2000-ish.</p>

<p>Also I think the cruise lines hire professional models and pro photographers for marketing images, like the casinos in washington state here - you go into the casinos there is NO ONE that looks like the patrons in the TV spots or print ads! lol And here in Seattle I see hundreds of cruise ship passengers weekly, I'm curious exaclty what kind of pics you'd be selling from tour boat photography.</p>

<p>but do let us know what the cruise line rep says about your request. My guess is there are plenty of college age kids that would do this in order to travel, and dont care about the image rights aspect.</p>

<p>I don't think its gall, its just what Kiti wants. Whether its realistic for Kiti to have what Kiti wants is another rmatter altogether.</p>

<p>Kiti,</p>

<p>Since you are talking about an Australian ship, the Australian copyright information might be a useful thing to look up. It will apply within Australian waters at the least, but I would imagine it will apply in general to your contract.</p>

<p>From the Attorney General's website:</p>

<p>http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/page/Copyright</p>

<p>Specifically, see this page:</p>

<p>http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Copyright_Whoisacopyrightowner</p>

<p>(read the second sentence on that page).</p>

<p>However, best thing is to discuss this as part of the negotiations and ensure it is clear to both parties before you sign a contract.</p>

<p>Regards,</p>

<p>Peter</p>