There's a situation going on right now that caught my attention; a situation of alleged copyright theft. Basically, it's a huge, hairy mess and my brain hurts a little from thinking about it.
Kind of want to clear the air on something, since it can be confusing.
I've been asked recently, "Do you allow your clients to print their own photos from the weddings you shoot?" Right now, the answer to that is "Yes." If they so choose, I pretty much just give permission (as well as advice) for my wedding/portrait clients to print the images from their sessions wherever they choose, whether it's from me or somewhere else... as long as it's only for personal use- say, to frame and display in the living room, print on a T-shirt, throw darts at, whatever. They just cannot use any of the images for profit (unless it's an actor headshot- I mean, they can't directly sell the images, but they are technically using them to get work, and that's okay since that's the whole point of the photo... see, this can get really tricky really fast!).
My point: Allowing clients to create prints for personal use does not mean they have the copyright to the images.
People sometimes don't know what copyright means, which is totally fine- I was/am a bit hazy on the subject as well! It's complicated. The copyright.gov site has an amazingly comprehensive FAQ list that is worth bookmarking, if you're interested in this sort of thing.
Basically, once I press my shutter button, I have created a work that I hold the copyright to. Unless I have signed a contract stating otherwise, I inherently hold the sole rights to make copies of this work, and to give permission for others to do the same- which is what I do for my clients. And by the way, permission is given in the form of a written and signed contract to cut down on any potential confusion.
I choose to allow my clients to print their images because it opens their options, and, in my opinion, is customer-friendly. I give the option to purchase the prints through my online gallery if they so desire, but if they don't so desire, that's fine with me too- I don't want to limit my clients' choices right now. The actual physical products that I offer will be morphing throughout the next year or so, so it's possible that this may change- but for now, it is what it is.
This is why buying copyrights can be expensive- because the purchaser is now the high king or queen of the relevant work of art who may either graciously bestow copy-rights to others, or guard them jealously. If I sell a copyright to an image I made, and then want to use that image again, I have to now get permission, which is a pain and which may be denied.
So... that's copyright, in a little tiny nutshell, as it relates to what I do. As usual, follow-up questions are welcome. :)
If you are receiving money in exchange for your creative efforts, by default you ARE NOT considered the author.
ReplyDeleteBasically, once you accept money to press your shutter button, your patron is considered the author, unless you have a signed contract stating otherwise. Here's some more details: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf
I was married 3 months ago. One of the photographers suggested a scheme similar to yours, and I outright rejected it because I saw it as not customer friendly at all. In the end, I had a small business woman take photos, I retained full copyright while granting her permission to use select photos in her portfolio and tagging her business when I posted them online.
There's nothing *wrong* with the way you're doing business, and if you and your clients are happy at the end of the day, then that's good business.
But you have to acknowledge that you're contractually circumventing how copyright is supposed to work, which as a client is something I refused to allow.
Clint- Thanks so much for the response. This is why I created this post- because you'll hear SO many things at the end of the day and I think it's best to be upfront and clear with the way I run my business at this time.
DeleteYour concerns are completely valid, of course, and if you, as the customer, wish to maintain full copyrights of the images, you will find people who will work with you on that.
Within the PDF you posted, there is a sentence on the front page reading that the session & photos are considered work-for-hire only "if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire." Which means that unless there is a signed contract saying this is a work-for-hire situation-- unless specified-- then by default, the author is the artist who created the work, and not the employer.