clients copying proofs

[amber1]

I am by no means a professional, but I have started taking portaits

for others recently and am starting to see a problem with giving out

proofs. I only give out a digital proof sheet with 2"x3" proofs.

They are printed on photo paper and are fairly high quality which I

like because I spend alot of time on the small details which I want

the client to be able to see. The problem is that I have recently

found out that two clients in particular have used the proofs to make

adds for football programs and school calendars. I would not have

minded had they asked and allowed me to print my business name in the

corner but they never even ordered any prints. Is there any way to

make sure that this doesn't happen I don't want to stamp proof across

their forehead! I would love for them to get the full effect of an

edited photo without having to worry about them using the proofs

instead of ordering photos. I do have a DBA on the business name but

I am not copyrighted so Im not sure if I have any legal merit to

request that they not use the photos with out my permission. Any

advice is greatly appreciated.

[gary_woodard]

If you took the picture legally you hold the copyright to the image, it doesnt matter if you are in buisness, out of buisness or whatever, if someone uses your image for commercial purposes without your consent, they are breaking copyright laws. Thats the law.

[EricM]

Amber, you have to learn your rights and start enforcing them. This is not cool what they've done, and it certainly happens too often. You have to stamp across the forehead for this exact reason. If they can't see the forest through the trees as it is, then the shots sucked. I batch action all of these kind of shots...

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2631103-lg.jpg"></center>

 

What does your DBA have to with copyright? You're business and your creation are two separate things that are not interdependent on one another. You have to start doing some reading Amber. And you certainly have legal merit. You send them a bill as they've assumed your terms and conditions and used your shot. No one has paper work, so the ball is in your court. I really wish passive photographers would stop shrugging their shoulders and rolling with the punches when we've been ripped off!

[Jerry_]

On the other end of the 'legal' aspect: did you have a 'release' for commercial use of the photos from the football team(s) and/or school or organization? If not, you have the 'fun' of giving hell to the client that already used the image(s); and you may have 'fun' dodging the league or school for use of images that were not properly 'released' for your business use.

 

 

 

(A rubber stamp "Copyright © 2004" is a good idea, too.

Add that to each image and the client can't use the proof.)

 

 

 

Good luck!

[h._p.]

The law on copyright varies quite a lot from place to place. From what you're

saying, here in Britain the customer would be quite within their rights if they

asked you to take the pictures and paid you a fee for doing so. In that case,

they would own the copyright.

 

You would be well advised to check with someone qualified, such as a lawyer

who specialises in copyright matters, to make sure that this isn't the rule in

your own area.

[EricM]

"...here in Britain the customer would be quite within their rights if they asked you to take the pictures and paid you a fee for doing so. In that case, they would own the copyright."

 

are you sure Harvey? that just sounds wrong...Maybe permitted usage, but transfer of copyright?

[james_oneill]

Harvey, you are wrong.

<a href="http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880048_en_1.htm">Here's a link to the copyrights designs and patents act </a>. Read (9), (11), and (85).<p>

 

9. says the photographer owns the copyright in the picture.<br>

11. Says unless they created it as part of their job - then their employer owns it<br>

85. Says that although the photographer owns the copyright, their rights are limited if the client commissions it for private and domestic purposes.

[james_oneill]

Amber: Just send them an Invoice: <p>

 

"Licensing fee for photographs used in [fill in blank] $750"<p>

 

Make the fee large but not stupidly so. If they refuse to pay, point out that they have taken your work without paying for it. Tell them they have a week to they get legal advice on their breach of your copyright and then decide how they want to settle the matter, you'll listen to alternatives to a $750 fee but if they don't come up with something acceptable, it's a day out with a judge. <p>

 

In future put <i>Copyright © 20004 Your name. All rights reserved</i> on the front of the proof sheets, so clients are in no doubt. <br>

Before you shoot get the client to agree a set of terms and conditions which acknowledge that you own the copyright, and they are not paying a copyright transfer fee. Include, if you like, that the standard fee for this is $750 or as negotiated.

[ranong]

amber,

i am not a pro either so i understand your difficulty. if i understand it correctly these 2 people are your friends? this would make it a bit difficult on you....BUT if they are your friends they should understand. (i use ofoto.com to share pictures with my friends as i travel overseas. you can buy my prints from them. i receive nothing. not even a note saying who bought what! many of my friends do not order prints because they see i get no money, and they think about the copyright thing also. true friends i would say.) anyway, it sounds like you should follow the advise from the above posters. i think you should definatly talk to your clients about this if they are your friends maybe bring it up so they know and then let the issue go. next time they will buy from you i am sure. IF they are not your friends by all means send em a bill! all us non pro photographers would love to get paid once and a while, and it sounds like you need to be paid! good luck. please keep us posted.

 

eddie

[amber1]

Hey guys thanks for all the advice. No the two clients were not friends, but refered to me by friends and yet even the friends that refered to me put my pictures in the adds WITH my permission and a plug in at the bottom of the add "photograph provided by..........."

They too were upset at the fact that these people assumed that since they paid me a $10 sitting fee that they had the right to use the proofs. I think that I will give them a friendly little phone call and let them know that if they wish to order any pictures that they need to do so before the end of the month or else I will just send a bill for the licensing fee. I will also have to make sure that I do protect myself better in the future by making sure they can't use my proofs. Any idea how I can get my hands on a copyright stamp? Or would it be enough to put my business name in the corner of the photo?<div></div>

[dai_hunter]

harvey platter , aug 22, 2004; 04:35 a.m.said: ...From what you're saying, here in Britain the customer would be quite within their rights if they asked you to take the pictures and paid you a fee for doing so. In that case, they would own the copyright....

 

 

Here in Britain they don't own s**t! There is NO work-for-hire doctrine in operation (unlike the US). Unless you are an EMPLOYEE and the work is created IN THE COURSE OF YOUR EMPLOYMENT - you own it. Full stop. End of story.

 

As James O' pointed out there is a potential hitch with s:85 BUT that only applies for work done for "private and domestic" purposes... and publishing in any form is not one of those. Even in s:85 areas, you own the copyright but can not freely use the images as you would be able to except for s:85 restrictions... BUT the client can't reproduce them (such as copying from proofs) either.

[h._p.]

Yes, James, you're right and I'm wrong. I'm afraid I haven't caught up with the 1988 act yet and still have my head in the 'secenties when the opposite was definitely the case (I had a friend who discovered that to his cost, in court).

[scott_davis5]

Amber- not to question your business practices too hard, but...

only $10 for a sitting fee??? No wonder they went ahead and used your proofs... you undervalue your work! Clients will respect you and your work more if they have to pay for it. If you're charging prices comparable to the K-Mart photo studio, that's the level of respect you'll command from your customers. You seriously need to take into consideration the cost of your time and effort - surely as a professional photographer you are worth more than a bit over minimum wage? I remember reading an article (I think it was in Shutterbug a couple years ago) about pricing ones work, and the photographer who wrote the article espoused charging a much higher sitting fee relative to the print cost, instead of charging a low fee and then trying to make money on the prints.

 

 

Another way to deal with your proof problem is to make the proofs available online only, so you can digitally watermark the images, and keep the resolution low enough that it ONLY looks good on a monitor.

[amber1]

Ok Scott, you are sounding like my husband! LOL I am having a problem with charging for my services. I guess I feel like if I am an amature then i should charge as such. I do normally charge a $20 sitting fee, but I have been told that that is not enough. I have been looking at it as a learning experience for me-I get the experience and they get cheap pictures, but the more clients I am builing up the harder it gets to do this at such little profit. I have told all that have used me that my prices will change as soon as my new "studio" is built and it is clearly stated on my price list as well. Thank you all very much for all of your advice. Its great to know that if I ever have a question there are many of you waiting to help out!--Amber

[bill c.]

------Ok Scott, you are sounding like my husband! LOL I am having a problem with charging for my services.----

 

 

Amber-- If your stuff is good enough that they want to use it in a brochure, then it's good enough for you to get paid for!

 

Here are some things you MUST do to protect yourself:

 

1. Do not ever let an image go out of your hands without a copyright on it with your name and phone number.

 

2. If you think that the people who you are giving the images to don't know the rules or are scammers, then write the conditions out on either the back of the images (I use lables that I pre-print for just such purposes) or on the bottom or top of the sheet where the images are gang proofed (I have the conditions in computer memory and stick them in a header or footer).

 

3. As illustrated above, watermarking across the images is a good way to protect them.

 

Here are things that you SHOULD do:

4. Have the recipient sign a delivery memo, and in the deliver memo make sure it states that they agree that you own the copyright and full rights to the images and agree to pay you current common use rates as stated in a particular publication (I use "Pricing Photography," or you can quote ASMP rules, etc.) if the images are used or copied in any way. Point out that it is against the law to remove a copyright notice from anything.

 

5. Every week or month, depending on your output, budget, and possible publication of your images, send a packet of the images you have taken to the copyright office for gang registration. You can register as many as you want for the same fee as a single image, if you do it right. However, this situation changes radically after the images have been published, so best to do it before, if you can.

 

You can even stretch this out to three or four times a year, IF you can still register things before they get published. If they do get published, then you have to send in published copies, and the paperwork and cost go up exponentially.

 

If you do register the copyright, and someone illegally uses your image, then you can get extra damages for the violation. If you don't register the copyright, then you can still sue them for the use fees, but you can't usually get enough compensation to pay for the legal hassle.

 

Happy shooting. -BC-