Limited Use Contract When Sharing Images with Vendors

[laurel_jensen]

<p>As a gesture of goodwill and relationship building I've offered to share images with other vendors (caterer, wedding planner, etc.) and want to send them a short "contract" before the wedding that allows use in marketing, etc. but not for resale. I want everything spelled out ahead of time so everyone is on the same page and is no second guessin.<br>

Does anyone have such a contract already? I'm calling it a limited-use contract and can draw one up but would love to see if there are any out there already so I don't miss something.<br>

Thanks to all!</p>

[mark_t5]

<p>I don't bother with a contract. I could care less if a vendor "sells" my picture. I doubt I'm missing much revenue from that market</p>

<p>I rather just give them the image ( websized should limit the amount of use they can get out of other than put them on their website, which is usually what they want ) and call it a day. Forcing them to sign a contract makes me look like I am trying to make their life miserable and that I don't trust them. Let's face it, most of us ain't that big shot of a photographer that needs to go to such great length.</p>

<p>I rather just give em a good impression that they can count on me for anything with no strings attached. Only one referral from them would probably offset any amount that I would have made from them selling my images.</p>

<p>You said "gesture of goodwill and relationship building".. but if you offered me an image that you shot and then tell me I need to sign this long piece of paper that tells me what I can and I can not do, unless there are UFO's or ghosts in that image of yours, I would probably just say thanks but no thanks.</p>

<p>but thats just me. Oh..and if you want to draft a contract, contacting a lawyer is probably better than asking an online forums for "samples".....</p>

[juanita_ramirez]

<p>I'm going to agree with Mark here. There's really no reason to worry or go to the trouble of drafting a contract. Does your picture of the wedding have a big market value to someone beside the vendor and the B&G? Likely not. I guess they could turn around and sell it as microstock and make tens of cents off of your fabulous image of the bouquet, but I don't think that's going to happen. Be flexible, be helpful, be friendly. Where your photo has almost zero value on the open market I wouldn't even consider asking for them to sign a use contract. Limit the size and you're good. </p>

<p>Make a connection, show them that you're cool, be flexible. Like Mark said, if it gets you a future gig, you're already way ahead. If you send out a contract to other vendors in advance of the wedding it will make you seem uptight and entitled. You don't want them to hate you before the event. That's just asking for trouble.</p>

[laronge photographie coutu]

<p>Forget the contract and just watermark the images somewhere that doesn't obscure the subject with your name and/or website.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>I would do this with models and just had a mutual use agreement. Nothing super legal or anything, but remember you really aren't protecting you, you're protecting them. You hold the copyright and anytime down the line might turn on them (unlikely certainly), but it also clarifies the use and is, most importantly, professional. Just make out a statement that the images you are delivering to them are given with your permission to use as promotional images for their business and for that purpose only. It can be and should be just plain english, no "for value received" or any of that non-sense, essentially a permission to use the images. Have both of you sign it and you are done--both of you keep a signed copy. You have protected them and ended up looking like you value your work and are a professional.</p>

[g.e._masana]

<p>If you insist on legal documents being signed off on by the vendors, you're effectively creating an obstacle in your path.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>Why would it be an obstacle to have someone sign and receive a permission to use your images? Of course, anything done in a tone of suspicion or which shows a lack of trust is going to come off bad. But if there is a spirit of giving and one of being professional--and in their interest, I think it is a perception, not a fact.</p>

<p>I wouldn't do anything up front, but when you deliver the images, then you deliver the permission to use the images. You make it another contact with the vendor and another chance to meet face to face, maybe have coffee--referrals come from people liking you and feeling comfortable with you. If you present the permission agreement as in their interest and something that will allow a designer or print house to use the images without worrying about copyright violation, it is a win-win. Folks need to present themselves as professionals. If you never ask for such an agreement, you set a precedent and when one shows up somewhere you didn't authorize, since you have a track record of just giving the images out without written approval, you will have a very weak case. </p>

<p>Just as an aside, I do and have done a lot of pro bono work for charities, I ALWAYS have an agreement that says how the images can be used--some will even ask me to be sure I do--or the designer will, they understand the issue--that they could be sued down the road!</p>

[craign]

<p>As always, consult a lawyer for legal advice. However, my understanding is that you want to give the vendor a license similar to what some deliver to the bride & groom when the couple have purchased print rights. I would give the vendor a CD with print-worthy photos (no more than 6) of their product at the wedding along with a copyright release that allows them to make any copies they need to market their work. Of course, putting your studio logo in a corner and stipulating that the logo not be removed will help with referrals back to you.<br>

With this, if they want to put the photo on their web site, they can. If they want a print for their portfolio book, they can have that too and they don't have to choose one over the other. If they want a really big, expensive print such as a 16x20 gallery wrap for their display, I would sell that to them.<br>

My $.02.</p>

[juanita_ramirez]

<p>I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with John A. In his first post he proposes a contract that is in all likelihood unenforceable. The "for value received" component is supposed to illustrate that there was consideration exchanged between the parties--thus making it more likely that the contract is indeed enforceable.</p>

<p>If a vendor asks you for a use contract, then sure you can provide one. If you want one that actually has any legal weight, then you'll need to probably get a lawyer because you're drafting a pretty non-standard agreement. This isn't something you're going to find on legalzoom.</p>

<p>If the vendor doesn't ask for a use contract, and it's a small-time vendor, I don't see the point in going through the trouble. I guess it protects them against <em>your</em> lawsuit, but frankly there's very very little money on the line, even if you decided to sue. It could protect you against it being sold in an album or something, but that seems very unlikely. </p>

<p>For all intents and purposes, your images (especially wedding images) have no market value. They're valuable to your clients and to the vendor. Period. No one is going to think that your picture of a vase is so fan-flipping-tastic it's going to be in the next Super-Bowl commercial.</p>

<p>The question you should ask yourself is--is it really worth all of this hassle--given how little is at stake? Honestly, as a vendor, if you asked me to sign a use release, I'd say thanks but no thanks, take the pictures myself (with a friends camera or the like) and spend the rest of the time badmouthing you to the wedding planner. Good luck booking the next wedding with that planner.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>@Juanita, you might actually go back and read what I said, I said "NO "for value received" or any of that non-sense", just a simple permission. What I was getting at is there is no reason for a contract, you are just giving them permission to use the photos in a specific way. My second post was simply that if you don't make it a habit of making sure you deliver a use specific agreement when you hand out photos, then when you do run into a problem, you don't have much history to stand on if the person says you told them it was ok. With a history of always specifying in writing, then the burden of proof is on the person who violates your rights very clearly--besides, it is professional!</p>

[juanita_ramirez]

<p>And, John A, you ignored the thrust of my comment which was "there's no market value for your photos, so who cares." These aren't landscapes or national geographic photos. They're pictures of flowers in a vase, and to be frank, you probably didn't spend much time even setting up the shot, because time is limited at a wedding. Honestly, are you going to have to go to the trouble of establishing a course of business for such a completely worthless purpose? I know we all want our IP protected, but if a web-sized copy of a bouquet shows up everywhere on the web, am I really going to court over this? </p>

<p>If you feel you absolutely must have a written permission slip, just email the images to them and in the email tell them they're free to use this on their website or blog for self promotion, and that they should get in touch with you if they need anything more than that. That solves your written record issue, and avoids asking for a signature. It still comes across as cordial. I don't know that your email is enforceable in court, by maybe it'll make you feel better.</p>

<p>As an aside, I find that definitions of professionalism in the industry vary. Some tell you to respond to clients promptly to be professional. Some encourage you to string them along endlessly and play hard to get. Some believe that you can only be a professional if you own a studio downtown with expensive equipment. I've decided that I pretty much ignore any suggestions about professionalism at this point.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>I guess I missed the obvious.....</p>