Loose copyright ends when working for free

[rob_sronce]

I am sure this has been addressed before, but I can't find it in the

archives. My apologies in advance.

 

I am strictly an amateur but I often take photos to document events

for my employer (a small city in California) and others. I do this

for fun as well as to develop my skills. The photos are sometimes

good enough that they want to use them and more often than not they

do so without asking me. When I have asked that they ask permission

first, they reply "hey you GAVE them to us" even when there has been

no license granted informally or otherwise. I now accompany any

transmisison of my images with a note to ask first before using.

 

I know that if they are good enough to use, I should really set up a

business and license them properly. Short of that I want to at least

control the use of these images. First because I want to know when

they are being used and second because I rarely obtain model

releases when doing these photos, so I want to have something that

acknowledges that the user knows that there has been no release.

 

So ... any advice on how to do a license agreement when working for

free? Or should I just realize I have let them out of my control,

suck it up, and be better about the formalities from here on out?

BTW, the advantage of working for free is that I get access to

events as a photog that I would not have otherwise.

 

-- Rob S.

[dave_nelson___atlanta__ga]

<p>You answered your own question in your post:<br>

<i>I am strictly an amateur but I often take photos to document events for my <b>employer</b></i></p>

 

<p>It does not sound like you are working for free, but working outside of your normal responsibilites. As an employee the courts would probably consider everything you do as being a "work for hire" and you would not own the copyright unless you have a contract stating otherwise.</p>

 

<p>It may be time to seek the advice of a lawyer.</p>

[bill_proud]

Rob,

 

The copyright belongs to your employer when you are documenting events for them. They may be unaware of this as well but, sad to say, is true.

 

If you wish greater control over usage, keep originals in your possession and show proofs only when asked to do so or in promoting yourself.

 

It always helps to have a model release but you are not required to obtain one at a public event as long as they are not used for editorial purposes.

 

And as always, consult a copyright attorney when in doubt.

 

cheers,

[fivetonsflax]

You mean *only* used for editorial purposes. A model release is necessary when using

images for commercial purposes.

[Jerry_]

It may be too late, but you have to make a decision: leave your camera at home and decline future 'assignments.' If you have been using your camera equipment and film (or digital media,) and you pass out the images 'gratis' -- why do you expect anything back in the form of notification?

 

 

 

If your employer gets a 'invoice' for your images, and the invoice states your conditions for use, you are entering the work force as a photographer. (But don't count on you employer being pleased by this turn of events. Once they are used to 'free' work, they tend to expect it.)

[rob_sronce]

Survey says ... suck it up kid! :p

 

Thanks for the patience shown in your replies.

 

-- RS

[craig_gillette]

You're kind of stuck here. There are specific legal rules for establishing whether the pictures are yours or the city's. Clearly the circumstances will make the difference. Don't expect that the city, or your supervisor has spent any time with the city attorney on this, just as you haven't spent any time with an attorney either.

 

The clearest and quickest way to resolve it is not shoot anything while on the clock. Then formalize the relationship for future shoots or future pictures.

[scott aitken]

Just because you are shooting some photos for your employer does not automatically

make it work for hire (and therefore their copyright, not yours).

 

If part of your normal job is company photography, and you are using their equipment,

and shooting on company time, and they are paying for film & processing (if you are using

film), then yes, the copyright belongs to them.

 

If, on the other hand, you are shooting on your own time with your own equipment, and

paying your own money for the film & processing, and your normal job has nothing to do

with photography, and your employer just happens to want to use a few, then you

probably own the copyright.

 

In between these two scenarios is lots of grey area. Attorneys love grey areas.

 

Whoever said to you "hey you GAVE them to us" obviously has no clue about copyright and

license issues. You might start by tactfully educating that person about copyright issues.

Letting them see the photos does not equate to giving them free license to use as they

like.

 

If

the company takes the position that your photography is part of your work product, and

they can use it for whatever they want, then I'd tell them to provide you with a company

camera next time, and they should at the very least be paying all of your out of pocket

expenses (batteries, film or memory cards, etc.), and they should be paying you for the

time you are shooting.