Copyright on Subject Matter

[Adamneedsadvice]

Hi, hoping someone can give me a quick answer

I wanted to take some photos of a replica armour piece I had commissioned for myself. I consider it a work of art and bought it for display, though people often commission such for use in reenactments, etc. It has a makers mark on it.

I wanted to take some nice photos of it, and possibly one day sell prints

Question is, can I just go ahead and do this (with intention of selling prints) or will I need permission from the armorer who made it?

Thanks!

 

[Formatted]

Very good question...

I don't know the answer but just a word of warning, everything said on this forum cannot be considered legal advice, if you do intend on doing this then contact a copyrights lawyer. They'll be able to give you a finite answer.

 

[Adamneedsadvice]

lol aww, I was expecting that answer!!

At this point in my "career" I cant afford to talk to a lawyer about it. I think It will be cheaper to just ask to person who made it just to be safe, and hope they give me permission or are willing to negotiate a reasonable compensation for use.

 

[Formatted]

Yep make sure you get it in writing

 

[Studio7Four]

You commissioned it - it's bought and paid for? Then out of curiosity why do you consider it any different than anything else you own (not trying to be snarky, just trying to understand if there's something I'm missing)? I assume you don't have hesitation about shooting anything else that is your property. Here's an example - if you were to shoot a still life of a flower in a vase, would you track down the greenhouse at which the flower was grown or the glassblower who made the vase? Similarly, if you were to hire a carpenter to construct a gazebo in your backyard, would you feel you need his permission to shoot people in it?

If anything, since you commissioned this piece, I would expect that you have ownership claim throughout the entire process. If the armorer was particularly proud of it and wanted to photograph it for images for his promotion or for sale, he would possibly need a property release from you. If you had, on the other hand, gone and picked something off the shelf, he would likely have had free reign to do anything with it until your purchase, at which point you gain the right to do anything you want with it.

(Okay, okay, I'm not a lawyer, but this is what my common sense tells me.)

 

[KmH]

By that same reasoning Rob, when a client commissions a photographer to make portrait photos of them, you "would expect that they have ownership claim throughout the entire process."

How about if the armour piece is considered sculpture?

www.copyright.gov

U.S. Copyright Office - Copyright in General (FAQ) When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

The armorer's work is protected by copyright.

The only way copyright would belong to whoever comissioned the work is if 'work-for-hire' provisions applied (won't apply in this case since the armorer is a contractor, not an employee) , or copyright was transfered in writing.

For more information peruse: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf

and http://www.copyright.gov/history/studies/study13.pdf

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Yup...even though you may be paying me to design and make something for you, I own the copyright. I am asked this often actually, when people want their commissioned piece to be a one of a kind, we discuss the cost of purchasing copyrights. It ends there.

I don't know how I'd feel if the customer was to take pictures of my work, and sell the image.

 

[orljustin]

You commissioned it - it's bought and paid for? Then out of curiosity why do you consider it any different than anything else you own (not trying to be snarky, just trying to understand if there's something I'm missing)? I assume you don't have hesitation about shooting anything else that is your property. Here's an example - if you were to shoot a still life of a flower in a vase, would you track down the greenhouse at which the flower was grown or the glassblower who made the vase? Similarly, if you were to hire a carpenter to construct a gazebo in your backyard, would you feel you need his permission to shoot people in it?

You may shoot whatever you like. What you are able to do with the image afterward is the issue.

 

[KmH]

Yep.

It boils down to what legally constitutes 'publication' and what legally constitutes a 'commercial use'.

The owner of the armor (the guy that comissioned is manufacture) can take all the photos he wants of the armour, can post them on any personal web site, make prints and display those prints anywhere he wants.

Selling those prints may be another issue.

 

[Overread]

I don't know how I'd feel if the customer was to take pictures of my work, and sell the image.

Surely there are wedding photographers taking photos of your rings all the time - from them being slipped into fingers through to the (possibly cheesy) images of the rings making little hearts with shadows in books and other similar shots.

I suspect that this area is full of grey and opinion with regard to how far you enforce your legal rights as well as to how far you can extend your legal right to protect your copyright of something.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Not concerned about wedding photography of my work. Aside from that (good point), I don't know why anyone would take a picture of their ring and try to sell it.