Do I need permission from clients to post pictures of their home?

<p>Am I allowed to post pictures of MY Interior Design Projects (online portfolio/ Facebook/ Linkedin/) of my clients’ homes.</p>

<p>I was the INDEPENDENT interior design CONTRACTOR for Mr. X and his wife. I was given verbal permission to take photos of their home- new construction. I hired a photographer to take photos; I took some too. Mr. X has now demanded that I take them off my website, threatening legal action.They didn’t sign a contract of any kind; we had verbal agreement . <strong>Am I legally allowed to use the photos, as claimns he never gave me permission? </strong><br /> Do I need to copywright the PHOTOS? If so, how? cost? What are Mr. x' s rights? I was hired by BOTH Mr. X and Mrs. X but they have since divorced and now Mr. X owns the home. Because it was the right thing to do, I took the website down from social media and offered to work this out. He will not respond to my emails, texts or calls. I am trying to be amicable and discuss this but he will not communicate.</p>

<p>You already own the copyrights to the photos, because you created them. And since you (not wisely, I'm afraid) conducted business without a contract, there's no mechanism in place conveying those copyrights to your client. <br /><br />But copyright ownership isn't the issue here. It's your customer's privacy rights. Just as you'd need your client to sign a release (typically referred to as a model release) in order for you to use a picture of his face as part of you promoting your business, you'd also need a <em>property release</em> that shows he's willing to let you use images of his property in the promotion of your business. When you use someone's likeness, or images of their property that can't be taken from easy public view (and your interiors would be just such shots), your use of their faces or their homes implies their endorsement of your business. Many people, whether or not they're happy with your services, have no interest in being used as part of your advertising. Without a signed contract that makes such arrangements, you need to honor his request.<br /><br />There's really nothing left to discuss with him, other than you attempting to convince him that whatever it is he'd rather not be showing in public (on your web site) is really nothing to worry about. But it sounds like he'd rather have his privacy.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Because it was the right thing to do</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Regardless of the legal issues, doesn't it pretty well end right there?</p>

 

<p>Legally it's their property and you should have cleared that up at the time this was done. A contract (not necessarily lengthy) would have been ideal. This way you could use the photos on your website or to educate others. </p>

<p>Technically, you legally own the photos, but without permission your hands are tied. Slapping copyright on them (at this point) is pretty much the same thing as 'verbal permission' - it does v. little. I'd say, chuck it to experience, learn from it, and go on.</p>

<p>If that was me, I'd try to set up lunch with this guy (show up physically) trying to heal any potential wounds.</p>

<p>That's just the way I see it....without dragging legal stuff into it.</p>

<p>Les</p>

<p>There is another angle to this. Of course you should have gotten a written release specifying what you wish to do with the pictures. You know that. You really can't use them for advertising now I believe. You need an attorney to tell you for sure.</p>

<p>There is a larger question that is not considered in these threads. (And we have a lot of them.) Suppose for a moment that you had obtained a release. After doing that the guy calls you up and politely asks you not to use them. He tells you that he has personal reasons for not wanting them out in public. Now what do you do?</p>

<p>If you had the release, and it did not specify that he could not change his mind, you could probably post them. What is the risk? Well. The risk is that he gives you bad reviews, never refers anyone to you and poisons the water for you with all of his friends and acquaintances. That is not good for your business. </p>

<p>Now consider that he sues you. Suppose he said that his wife gave the permission, not him, and that it is no longer her house. It is his. Could he prevail in court? I have no idea. I know this though. It will cost you a whole lot of money to find out. I don't mind paying an attorney but I hate to do it over a self-inflicted wound. </p>

<p>Sometimes, in any business, the right thing to do from a business standpoint does not hinge on the legality or illegality of your proposed action. </p>

<p>The privacy element the others are discussing are at the cautious end of the spectrum of an emerging concept. Property, itself, is not capable of losing privacy. People are. But some say what someone's home has going on inside is a private affair of theirs and started saying a property release is needed. This has created a snowball effect of sorts as more and more people have SAID one is needed and obtained them, it is becoming a sort of self fulfilling prophecy that they are because of the more widespread use. Its a murky area with many questions such as, if the residence is sold, do those new owners get a say as well? Whether sample use exception applies, such as exists in some jurisdictions concerning photos of people, is unsettled in some jurisdictions as well. It isn't a surprise now if a particular state court says it is needed in some circumstances. Not worth finding out unless the images are critical for your business. Presumably you have others to use now.<br /><br /> They are right to say the bigger picture is not legal but whether it is good for business to have to a ongoing dispute about it. Again, if it is not of critical importance, it is not really worthwhile.<br /><br /> Bottom line, the others make prudent observations. Unless critical to your business, use other samples instead.</p>