hat I was trying to say was that irrespective of copyright ownership of the image, the actual piece of plastic containing the image would belong to Nathan if he had bought the film in the first place. Same situation for ownership of a compact flash card if it had been shot digitally (still desperately trying to bring the tread back to list guidelines).
Dear Steve, I think that is not true, as there was a precedent set in a court case a few years back. Ok to get technical, if the film was bought by nathan, then as the photographer who shot them owns the copyright, then he has the right to request the negs and reimburse Nathan for the film. If however the photographer bought the film and invoices it as materials, then the negs belong to the photographer, without question. To be a digital argument. Regardless of who owns the cf card, camera etc. The copyright and ownership lies with the creator, i.e. the photographer who shot it. Another way of looking at is. If you gave damian hurst a canvas and the paint which you bought. He painted the picture, in what ever style he does, then who owns the rights of the picture. Obvious damian hurst, not the person who bought the materials needed for creation. The person who bought the materials has the right to request payment for the materials, but it clearly states, as said earlier on the list, that the creator owns all intellectual rights to the image for his lifetime plus 75 years, period. This is enshrined in law and from what I hear there is a growing lobby in this country to go the way of France, where re assignment of copyright is unlawful. cheers Ian Reynolds =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
