=======================================================
-> This is The 'SPORRS' Mailing List
-> Info File: http://www.anet-stl.com/acphotog/sporrs/infosporrs.htm
-> Note: Remember to include your name in each list post or reply.
-> Please delete all unnecessary quoted text from the original message!
=======================================================

Todd Novak wrote:

> A question I have is who owns the rights to a photograph once it is sold
> (the original slide/negative)? 

The rights and the actual photograph are two different things, but you can
sell both together with one simple receipt.  

You can sell your actual photograph (slide) and keep the rights to use it
yourself if you write a contract that way, and you can sell the photo
outright and TRANSER your copyright to the new owner (transfer happens
automatically when you sell them the physical film), in which case you no
longer own the physical photo or the image from it at all, and you cannot
use it for anything again, because it is no longer yours: you sold it (also
known as an outright buyout or work-for-hire).  And without a receipt (or
copyright registration), ownership of the image is then questionable, but
it usually (nearly always) falls with the one in possession of the
photograph.  If you sell someone a photograph outright, then they have
every right to ask you for a receipt so that you cannot come back and claim
it is still your photo after they bought it from you.  Now you can see that
a simple receipt can save lots of aggravation and misunderstanding (and
legalities) later.

And there are variations: You can sell an actual physical photo or slide to
someone with CONDITIONS OF USAGE.  Such as the right to still use the image
yourself, or a restriction on how they can use the photograph that you just
sold them.  Such as a wall hanging (art print) where you specify that they
can only display it in their home or office, and not in a public gallery or
copy it and sell those copies of it for a profit (or otherwise).  Contracts
are important when you sell images.  If you don't write and transfer one,
then you just simply sold the image (like a slide), and it is gone and that
is the end of it.  Then it is no longer yours, just like if it never was. 
And without a contract, it is your word against the buyer if an ownership
dispute comes up in the future.  You may have to do more than prove that
you shot it then.  You will have to prove that you still own the image in
the buyer's possession.  Without a registered copyright, good luck.   

> I have discussed this question with many
> people and have gotten various answers.
Well, it's important to get the correct answers and know the laws and the
facts with this matter because guessing can cause you many hidden headaches
and expenses (and maybe fines and prosecution) later.

> If someone sells a slide for
> $1.00/slide or $100/slide, does the buyer then get the rights to this
> particular photograph? 
Yes, he gets the whole image and all of the rights unless you specify
otherwise in writing.  The $ amount has no effect on the usage, and it is
negotiated separately.  If you sell the photo and all of the rights, then
it is no longer your image.  Period.

Any of you guys that have sold slides: those images are no longer yours,
and you have no claim to them, even if you see them again, unless you buy
them back from who currently owns them.  You say you have dupes or motor
drive shots a fraction of a second apart that look identical?  Without a
contract, if one or both are published, you can have a situation.  That is
why it is best to limit publication rights on slides that you sell, and to
notify the buyer at the time of purchase that they are buying a copy that
you still own the rights for.  It gets complicated if you don't put it in
writing.  I simple Xerox will suffice.

> I understand that credit is always given to the
> photographer,
You don't have to give credit to the photographer if you bought the image
from them with all of the rights.  It's your image then.  You can even lie
and say that you shot it then, and the photographer can't be awarded any
judgment from you, even though you would be ethically sleazy at that point.

> I was just wondering if the person who purchases a slide or
> negative can freely use it in a book, magazine, for duplication,
printing,
> etc?
Yes, as long as you also bought all of the rights with it (complete
copyright transfer).

> I have seen a lot of things in print that have a credit such as
> this...."John Doe photograph, Smith collection." I would assume this
means
> that the owner, not the photographer, has submitted the photograph for
> publication. 
Correct.  The owner may be acknowledging the photographer for several
reasons though, one of which may be simply for respect and proper credit
for creating the image, but it could also mean that the photographer sold
the image with the stipulation that they are credited for it if it is
published.

If you would like to learn more about copyright than I can tell you, please
go to the Copyright Office web site, or contact an organization like the
American Society of Media Photographers (ASMP) for more information on
photographer's rights.

US Library of Congress Copyright Office web site:
http://www.loc.gov/copyright

ASMP National:
http://www.asmp.org

ASMP St. Louis:  (shameless plug for one of my web sites) 
http://www.asmpstlouis.org

Dave Cohen
Photographer, Member ASMP
Action Photographic Webmaster
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.anet-stl.com/acphotog/home/

=======================================================
-> SPORRS: 'Serious Photographers Of Railroad Related Subjects'
-> Web Site: http://www.anet-stl.com/acphotog/sporrs/
-> Message © 1998 SPORRS® - All Rights Reserved
=======================================================


Reply via email to