Client asking for the Copyright to my pictures

[jeff_sudduth]

<blockquote>

<p>This is not uncommon in commercial environments. For example I worked in Marketing for a global confectionery/petfood player that insisted that all creative work carried out on their products had the copyright assigned to them with no originator licence to use. Simple- the agencies and the creatives they brought in could either take it of leave it. I can't recall any agencies complaining that their chosen creatives were refusing to work this way.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Now Dave I'm sure the OP wouldn't be posting if a multibillion dollar multinational called her up dictating terms... while filling out a five figure check. Give the gal some credit. She lives in Switerland... I'm sure she's heard of money and knows what it is worth. What we are actually discussing is some schmuck amateur who thinks everyone on the internet wants to take time out of their day to look at pictures of her kid.</p>

<p>Carolina Parra, my knee jerk reaction is what else is this chick going to be a pain in the ass about. Some types of business you just don't need. If she is cutting a decent size check and/or there is the potential for good/bad word of mouth then you may have to reevaluate. Perhaps you can write an agreement that says you retain copyright but disallows the use of the pictures for self promotion, etc if that is the potential client's concern.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>There are other reasons to hang on to copyright, it's not just about whether you can promote yourself with the pictures. Scenarios may sound unlikely - but they do happen. What if you were to find the images being used to promote another business? That could be another photographer (let's say the client's sister decides to set up a baby photography business) you'd probably want to have the right to object. Or perhaps the client is setting up a business and wants to use the pictures to promote the business, and saw this as a cheap way to get hold of professional pictures without paying for a full advertising license. Or you might find that the pictures are going to be used in a magazine to illustrate an article - you might want either a separate payment for such use, or at the very least crediting as the author of the pictures.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Simon Crofts, a very reasonable and clear reply. If some photographers want to work as whores that is their business, but I would not appreciate it if someone came in posing as a person looking for some family pictures and then abused me for their own commercial purposes. I am an amateur and routinely take pictures of people and give them small files or full size prints for free. If someone starts to ask for all sorts of free professional stuff I say either hire a professional or PAY ME and accept you are getting an amateur and you are okay with that. But under no circumstances do I take my time, trouble, and effort and then hand over full size files or negatives without a contract and appropriate remuneration.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>You can even make a marketing point out of it. Personally, I wouldn't employ a photographer who cared so little about their images or their business, or who knew little about market practise that they would give copyright away without a thought, it tends to happen at the bottom end of the market - burn and gurn, dump and run etc., and <strong>it can look more professional if you can point out the very good reasons why you don't just hand over copyright</strong>.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Agreed. The number one thing is to be polite and professional. When these types of situations come up, which is rare, I just calmly explain how things work and why. Even though I am an amateur my name is worth something. I've even gone so far as to sell some images, retain copyright, and ask that I NOT be credited because the images were controversial and I did not want them to interfere with my day job.</p>

<p>Bottom line folks control your work. And if you have to sell out... be like the girls at Eliot Spitzer's agency of choice, charge prices that make clients' eyes water. I still can't believe he paid that much. I've never had anything that good.</p>

[jeff_sudduth]

<p>I got a couple of big (16x20) prints made at Sam's Club. Check out this section of the <a href="http://www.samsclub.com/sams/pagedetails/content.jsp?pageName=termsandconditions">Terms of Service</a>...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>For all materials you may use or allow others to use in connection with the Site, including materials posted or submitted to the Site (the "<strong>Materials</strong>"):</p>

<ol>

<li>

<p><strong>You grant to samsclub.com a non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, unrestricted, world-wide right and license to access, use, copy, reproduce, distribute, transmit, display, perform, communicate to the public, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, and otherwise use such Materials (in whole or in part) in connection with the Site and/or the Products, using any form, media or technology now known or later developed, without providing compensation to you or any other person, without any liability to you or any other person, and free from any obligation of confidence or other duties on the part of samsclub.com, its affiliates and their respective licensees;</strong></p>

</li>

<li>

<p>You grant to all users of the Site who enter the correct Album Password, permission to access, view, store, copy, reproduce, distribute, transmit, display, perform, and reproduce such Materials (in whole or in part) in any of the ways facilitated or provided by the Site;</p>

</li>

<li>

<p>You represent and warrant to samsclub.com and all users of the Site that (i) their use of the Materials does not and will not violate or infringe the rights (including copyright, moral rights, and other intellectual property rights and privacy and personality rights) of any other person or any applicable laws; and (ii) you have all the rights necessary to grant all rights and licenses set forth above; and</p>

</li>

<li>

<p>You also grant to samsclub.com the right to use your name in connection with the Materials.</p>

</li>

<li>

<p>Notwithstanding the foregoing, <strong>samsclub.com will not disclose, use or modify Materials for marketing purposes or any other purposes without obtaining your express permission</strong> unless required to do so by law</p>

</li>

</ol></blockquote>

<p>Pretty interesting, huh?</p>

[john_h.1]

<blockquote>

<p>Scenarios may sound unlikely - but they do happen.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br />The odds of this happening are low in general. The odds of that happening in this one off situation are minuscule.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>clients need to be educated that it's not a normal thing to do.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br />It is normal, even where it isn't done most of the time. As to weddings, which was mentioned, its becoming quite common.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br /><br />the client doesn't NEED copyright (unless of course she really is going to set up a business using your pictures</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br />She does if she wants standing herself to prevent others, including third parties, from using them. Which seems to be the case.<br>

<br />f you're going to be keeping copies of the pictures as a service in case she loses them, you don't want to be asking her for permission every time you make a back up.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br /><br />A one sentence mention in the contract that the photographer may make back up copies or that the photographer won't be responsible for keeping copies solves that easily. While anecdotal, I know one photographer that transfers copyright, in part, so he doesn't have to deal with after shoot copyright and licensing issues at all which seems to serve him well.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br />I wouldn't employ a photographer who cared so little about their images or their business<br>

<br /><br />Transferring copyright doesn't mean the photographer doesn't care. There is often sound business reasons to do so.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><br />a gentle, reasonable and polite letter explaining how things work is likely to reassure her and look professional.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br />or waste everyone's time since she made her position known and/or doesn't care "how things work" knowing she will almost certainly find someone accommodate her.<br>

<br /><br />In the unlikely case that it doesn't (and I've never lost a client in this way), spend your time on other, more reasonable, clients.<br>

<br /><br />This is kind of arrogant. Lots of people want to obtain ownership of images they pay for. Lots of them get it knowing full well how copyright retention benefits photographers. There's nothing unreasonable about it. Its either agreeable or its not.<br>

<br /><br />Carolina can run her business how she wants. She doesn't even need a reason to turn down the proposed arrangement for this one off deal. But, if these are reasons, they are weak ones.</p>

[steve m smith]

<p>A contract, like a price, is just a starting point offer to trade. If you don't like the terms you can either look elsewhere or suggest other terms.</p>

<p>It's nothing personal, it's just business. The sort of thing people do every day.</p>

[john_h.1]

<p>Exactly.</p>

[j_photography]

<p>Do not sign over your copyrights. As the photographer who shot the image you own the rights to your imagery. Your client may not want the images used for self promotion and I understand that. However, you can sign that you will not use her images in that way. If you sign over your copy rights the client can make changes to your work and you cannot say anything about it or if any profits are ever made you cannot retain royalties. So the same way your client is concerned about how she may perceived you can view this the same way on your work. </p>

[simon_crofts]

<blockquote>

<p>This is kind of arrogant. Lots of people want to obtain ownership of images they pay for.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sorry, I find your reply rather arrogant, and lacking any credibility.</p>

<p>Photographers have fought for decades for the right to copyright to their photographs. Many of them brilliant photographers, who also knew the business inside out.</p>

<p>Photographers' right to their copyright was hard won in legislation in the 1980's and nowadays amateurs of internet forums like this have a nasty habit of dismissing it as 'valueless' and trying to portray it as normal to give it away. Which it isn't, at least not among any photographers that I know, except perhaps at the very bottom of the market (or in certain very specific cases).</p>

<p>If you are going to try to undermine all that by telling us that giving away copyright is 'normal', then I would really like to know details of your photography business before taking anything you say seriously. How much do you earn from photographs a year? How does your particular business model work, and so on.</p>

<p>Otherwise, I find this kind of feeble dismissal of common sense, without even any attempt to justify your point of view if you have one, not worth the time of day.</p>

[j_photography]

<p>I agree with <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=5586095">Simon Crofts</a> 100%! You are absolutely right professional photographers work very hard at what we do. To have someone come in and and belittle our craft is a bit annoying. I think the person who wrote the question is taking the right steps and educating themselves. That is the best thing any photographer can do. There are many aspects to the business side that many just do not know. </p>

[Spearhead]

 

 

<blockquote>

<p> I find this ... not worth the time of day.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Obviously that wasn't the case.</p>

<p>Feel free to disagree, but these kinds of comments are not acceptable. </p>

 

 

 

 

 

[carolina_parra]

<p>Thanks every one for the answers. The client agreed that copyright was not negotiable :) I modified the contract adding:<br>

"The Photographer will not use any image commercially or in publicity without first obtaining the written permission of the Client."<br>

She was happy and thanks me for explaining her why I don't give away my copyright.<br>

I agree with J Photography and Simon Croft. I learned a lot about copyright this days :)</p>