who owns the negatives?

Hi guys, I was wondering if someone here could shed some light on my current

situation.

 

So I'm just starting out in the photography business, I'm kinda young and I'm

not exactly sure how this goes. I started working for this promotions/pr company

as their in-house photographer of sorts. They're good people, if not a little

inexperienced themselves. It's a new company so there were no contracts signed

or anything, they just give me a paycheck twice a month at best.

 

Anywho, I shot portraits of two "celebrities" for them, which turned out pretty

good. They said I could use the images for my portfolio, which was great and I

wasn't planning to sell them anyway since I did shoot it for the company, etc.

 

I was wondering though, since I shot it on film, do I get to keep the negatives?

I assume since I am the photographer and there was no paperwork signed giving up

the rights to the images, I get to keep the negatives. I have a feeling though

that the company is gonna want to keep them, but I'm sure they'd let me take

hi-res scans and prints if I wanted to. In fact, they negs are at the office

right now, stored away. The only issue for me really is the ownership of the

negatives, which I think is pretty important.

 

I know I could probably just go ask the boss if I could keep them, but I wanna

know if there are any unspoken rules/potential foibles I'm unaware of concerning

situations like this. Plus, I don't see myself working there for very long, so I

don't know how I'm gonna settle this. Should I barge in and demand for the

negatives? Or should I just settle for hi-res scans of my choice (though i could

scan everything, really) which would cost a pretty penny?

 

Thanks for the wisdom guys.

If you are an employee, the company owns the negs. If they don`t want them, they are yours.

 

If you are a contracted photog to do a certain job or you sell them usage rights, that should be specified in a contract.

 

Sounds like you are in the middle somewhere. Even if you are part time and they pay social security and tax deductions, then you are an employee. If they pay for usage rights, however vague and unstipulated, and just hand you a payment check for the work, you are an independent contractor. You are supposed to pay your own taxes on the income after deducting business expenses and establishing you profit. You pay tax on the profit only if you set up the business.

"If you are an employee, the company owns the negs." Not true in the USA. That has to be

specified in writing in your employment contract.

You could start by reading the Library of Congress website on copyright, especially the section/pdf on "work for hire." You and they seriously need to get the employment and ownership issues under control, on contract, in writing or it will come back to bite you or them later.

 

There are laws that describe the the "copyright ownership" criteria but it involves a variety of conditions and as many employment/work scenarios are different, they may be a bit hard to apply easily. If you have a clear set of statements in your employment contract, you may not like the conditions but they are out there and defined.

Chuck -

 

Consult with a local employment lawyer. Find one who specializes in employment issues. Next best bet is a lawyer that specializes in Intellectual Property rights.

 

Did I mention consult a lawyer? As helpful as we are on this forum, we for the most part aren't attorney's at law and don't know all of the specifics as they apply to your situation / location.

 

Dave

Who ever bought/paid for the film ends up the owner of the negatives. When this issue was bought up with digital cameras, it the owner of the memory card who ended up with the rights for the photos, even if you used your camera and computer to produce these images.

<i>Who ever bought/paid for the film ends up the owner of the negatives. </i><p>Can you provide a citation on this?

Or that the owner of the card ended up with the rights?

 

You really need to protect your own interests by having a competent contract in place. You don't want to be sitting there assuming that because you did something, it's all "yours," while the boss is assuming an entirely different result from the same circumstances.

 

Start here:

 

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap2.pdf

 

and here:

 

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf

This is probably the worst place to ask legal questions of this sort. The responses are frequently incorrect.

 

The way you ask the question suggests you are concerned about both the ownership of the images and the physical medium the images are contained on. With that in mind, it is simply untrue that the ownership of an image by a hiring party MUST be set forth in writing in an employment contract to be valid. Ellis, as knowledgable about the photography business as he is, has been saying this for a long time but its not accurate. If the images were taken under a work for hire/employee situation, the employer owns the copyright. If one is acting as an independent contractor, the image is the IE's unless (Here's where Ellis' comment actually counts) there is an agreement in writing to the contrary. The legal determination of whether one acts as an employee is based on a continuum of factors showing control of the hiring party over the actor. If the greater majority of factors show control over the actor, the more likely an employee relationship will exist. If the review of the factors show that there is a lack of control, then an IE situation is likely. Its a balancing test. There are many factors that are considered and providing a list here is too cumbersome for the moment. The same as to a discussion of physical property.

 

My suggestion is to disregard the advice given here, including my comments, except those made by Craig which are the best and refer you to independent and reliable sources. Finally, if you seek legal advice, the proper people to seek it from are lawyers.