legal obligation for delivery

<p>Hi everyone<br>

new to the forum, I hope someone can help. Here is the situation</p>

<p>I did a shoot for a friend/model with a verbal agreement that stated the terms of use. clean images for her website, with text credit and/or byline on the page. For social media usage, I provide her with watermarked images. No financial payment was requested. The watermark/exposure was what i was to receive.</p>

<p>After the shoot, but <strong>before</strong> delivery she changed her mind and said she didnt want to use any watermarked images, at all.<br>

I'm not a fan of just credit on social media as it can easily be deleted or removed when retweeted, pinned or shared. This is all I asked for in return as non-financial payment or trade.<br>

I am not happy with her change of heart. No model release was signed.</p>

<p>Am I obligated to deliver any photos to her? I understand that I may not use them myself and I'm ok with that. i do not want her de-valuing my time and work and I am content deleting the shoot.</p>

<p>What are my rights/obligations?</p>

<p>thank you</p>

Movie mogul Sam Goldwin supposedly once said, "a verbal contract isn't worth the paper its printed on."

 

(He didn't actually say that, but it makes for a good quip.)

 

Are you legally obligated? With no contract probably not, and if you can prove she tired to change what you'd agreed to

go if she took you to small claims court, well good luck to both of you.

 

What I'd do is: register your copyrights (costs about $35.00 for all of them plus about half hour of time), deliver the

watermarked versions along with a notice in writing that the watermark must be included in any usage and that the photos

have been copyrighted (you should include the copyright symbol in your watermark just for good measure.)

 

That way you have honored your side of the agreement.

 

But with no model release in hand, you shouldn't use them either.

<p>It seems to me that you have nothing useful in the first place. You do not have a model release. I am no expert and there are some here who will set you on the right path. It seems that Ellis has done so. </p>

<p>Without a model release, what interest is it that you think you are protecting?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks Ellis, good advice<br>

Rick the model release and terms of usage had yet to be signed. The model reneged on the verbal agreement prior to signing and prior to file delivery.</p>

<p>At this point I choose not to proceed.</p>

<p>And again, at this point i do not intend to use them at all. The model release and terms of use were forthcoming but no longer.</p>

<p>This is not a business arrangement with a paying client who hired you or with a model you hired. In the absence of a written contract and release, it's just you taking some pictures of a friend. You would like to have some pictures to show and so would she. I would give her what she wants the way she wants it and remain friends. Stay friends with her and you can use her to practice your photography on in the future. Escalate this and you'll lose a friend and practice subject.<br /><br />Going forward, don't try to do business with friends. And with strangers always have a written contract and, where appropriate, a written model release.<br /><br />Never, ever delete a shoot. 1) it's your work and 2) if she's a wannabee model and beats the odds to ever become famous someday, you might have a chance to sell the pictures whether you have a release or not.</p>

<p>Hi Craig, thanks for the perspective.</p>

<p>Well she is starting a business and that's what the photos would be used for. So there is potential for monetizing on her behalf down the road, and creating a brand using my photos.<br>

So while there was no talk of financial compensation for me, there was some sort of cross-promotion involved, which is now off the table.</p>

 

<p>Hi Vic, do you know the reason behind her objection to the watermark? Did you send her samples? </p>

<p>Is it possible that you can both agree on a discreet watermark to resolve the matter?</p>

<p>Hi Michael,<br>

her reason is that she has been looking at other fashion designer websites, and sees that none of them have watermarks (her reasoning is likely flawed. They are established and likely paid to license the clean images, which she doesn't want to do)</p>

<p>I have offered a more discreet watermark but she is dead set on a professional look.</p>

 

<p>Vic, I can understand her objection then. Having a watermark on a potentially professional site presentation might give it that Time-for-Print perceived look by viewers.</p>

<p>Seems to me that you've both done the work; now it's a question of whether it'll go to waste or toward fruitful use if you can both come to an agreement.</p>

<p>I don't think this issue should rise to the level of legal interpretation; it's a resolvable matter that involves compromises or the search for alternatives. It'd be a shame to abandon the effort. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>It definitely would be a shame. I understand she doesn't want TFP, but she's also not willing to compensate financially and I don't want to devalue my work.</p>

 

<p>The question is would you have done it in the first place if that is what she asked of you? Your answer will determine your course of action. Plain and simple. </p>

<p>No. I would not have done it for zero credit or financial compensation</p>

<p>Ok so there is your answer. Explain that to her just like that and if she has a half a brain she will understand that and she can go and find someone else who is willing to do it for her.</p>

<p>Also let her know that you also are disappointed.</p>

<p>Vic, no, she can't use the pictures with a watermark on them on her website, and that's not the proper way to give you credit. The proper way is a credit line next to the photos reading "Photo by Vic Smith" or "VicSmithPhoto.com" or something that can lead viewers to you in case they like your work and want to hire you. (That's why one of my examples is your web address, although I don't know your actual web address.)<br /><br />Tell her that the deal is she can use the pictures for free provided she gives you some type of credit as described above. If she doesn't want to give a credit, then she can pay you. If she doesn't want to give credit or money, no photos.<br /><br />You should have been clearer both with her, and with what you posted here. She is not a model and this is not a model-photographer trade for print. She is businessperson who wanted sample photos of her product (her fashion designs). The fact that she was the person wearing them in the pictures (I'm assuming that's what the pictures were of) is secondary. What you got out of it would be the exposure on her web site. Since you are presumably not an established professional (or you would have had a signed contract, model release, etc.) that exposure may or may not have some value to you.</p>

<p>i want to re-emphasize what I said in OP:</p>

<p>the clean unwatermarked images would have been provided to her FOR FREE, if she shared watermarked images all over her social media</p>

<p>that is what she balked at</p>

<p>I do appreciate the advice and suggestions, but I just want to know if I choose not to go forward and process the images and work with her, am I in the wrong?</p>

<p>she broke a verbal agreement, so I feel justified in not moving forward</p>

<p>I just want to know if I owe her the photos even though she changed her demands</p>

<p>thanks</p>

 

<p>Vic, in my view, she will have no claim to the pictures if she violated the terms of your verbal agreement. </p>

<p>The consideration in this case is the exchange of services from which you respectively receive something of value from the other - she gets the pictures, and you get the exposure from her posting of the pictures. You have both also agreed on the method of your exposure through watermarking. </p>

<p>So, there was meeting of the minds (offer and acceptance), there was consideration, and there was performance which you have partially fulfilled and are willing to complete according to the original agreement, but she isn't, so the deal's off and you're under no obligation to move forward unless you choose to give her the watermarked photos per your agreement.</p>

<p>Vic, I dont understand what is so difficult to understand what to do on your part? There must be more to your relationship with this woman than your telling us. Read my lips.. NO, YOU DONT HAVE TO GIVE HER THE PHOTOS. YOU ARE NOT UNDER ANY OBLIGATION! SHE BROKE THE VERBAL OBLIGATION. Only you can make the final decision based on information you have not disclosed to us. Your beating a dead horse at this point. Good luck!</p>

<p>Actually, she is obligated to you. She promised you publicity if you'd shoot her for free. You detrimentally relied on that promise (i.e., you provided the service), and now she's reneged.<br>

That said, the stakes are so small here that it's probably best just to forget it.</p>