Copyright Quetsion

Marshall21 · Feb 27, 2011

Hi everyone, I am an independent musician, who hired a photographer to take some images for my websites (myspace, facebook), my promo pic, maybe pic for a CD. Basically pics of me.

I need your advice, because basically after I payed $325 for 2 looks, and he signed an agreement that he will send me a CD of all unedited images plus 6 retouched images, he says he will give me ONLY 6 images and that's it.

He threatened me with copyright law, and said that I am not allowed to use the other images only 6. And he basically sent me 9 low resolution pictures and would not give me anything else.

I wanted to have a variety for my personal use, my music etc. I am not selling pics,
or making money on them.

For me $325 to pay for 9 photographs with low resolution, that if you enlarge for my site, you see pixels, it is very expensive, and I would have not have hired him.

He told me I can use only 6, and only for website and that's it, otherwise he will talk to his lawyer and I will violate the law.

This makes no sense to me, I payed for this photo shoot specifically to use pictures for my site.

Also why he did not state this before the photo shoot? he says that if I want to use the other images I would have to pay $1000 for copyright for each image.
Again, I am not a company, nor a signed artist.
I am so confused. I just wanted to have pics for my music site. or maybe my flyers for show.

I know this is a photographers forum, please help me

And thanks everyone from my all heart. I always dealt with amazing photographers, and this is the first time, someone has been very unprofessional to me.

He lied about doing a shoot in a studio, it was in someone's apt, and the hostess, kicked us out within 1st hour of the photoshoot, so we had to rush.

Thank you

e.rose · Feb 27, 2011

I'm confused...

Marshall21 said:
I need your advice, because basically after I payed $325 for 2 looks, and he signed an agreement that he will send me a CD of all unedited images plus 6 retouched images, he says he will give me ONLY 6 images and that's it.

So it's on a written and signed document that he was going to give you a CD of all the images and 6 edited ones? And after the shoot refuses to do that and will only give you 6? The way you wrote that out is a bit contradictory, so I just want to get clarification on it...

Marshall21 said:
He threatened me with copyright law, and said that I am not allowed to use the other images only 6. And he basically sent me 9 low resolution pictures and would not give me anything else.

I wanted to have a variety for my personal use, my music etc. I am not selling pics,
or making money on them.

For me $325 to pay for 9 photographs with low resolution, that if you enlarge for my site, you see pixels, it is very expensive, and I would have not have hired him.

He told me I can use only 6, and only for website and that's it, otherwise he will talk to his lawyer and I will violate the law.

This makes no sense to me, I payed for this photo shoot specifically to use pictures for my site.

Also why he did not state this before the photo shoot? he says that if I want to use the other images I would have to pay $1000 for copyright for each image.
Again, I am not a company, nor a signed artist.
I am so confused. I just wanted to have pics for my music site. or maybe my flyers for show.

I know this is a photographers forum, please help me

And thanks everyone from my all heart. I always dealt with amazing photographers, and this is the first time, someone has been very unprofessional to me.

He lied about doing a shoot in a studio, it was in someone's apt, and the hostess, kicked us out within 1st hour of the photoshoot, so we had to rush.

you can hear my music here

myspace.com/margarita

It sounds to me like there was a MAJOR communication error... possibly on both parts... I don't know enough about the situation to make that call.

What it comes down to though, is this:

If you both signed a contract... you go by what the contract says. If the contract says he's going to give you something and then refuses, he's in the fault. But if the contract states that he was going to give you exactly what he already gave you... then it's your fault for not *reading* the contract... I'm not sure which situation it is, since I don't know what the contract looks like or if there even WAS one.

The fact that you're not a signed artist has nothing to do with the situation. Copyright law applies to everyone... not just those making mega bucks. So again, it comes down to what the contract says...

And to put things into perspective... it's totally *NOT* uncommon for a photographer shooting a band to charge extra for different uses of photos. Some photographers will do the shoot so the band can use the images on their website, like you're saying, but if they want to make posters, CD covers, T-shirts, etc., using the image, they have to pay extra... and it's also not uncommon for a band to only get a few shots out of the shoot.

My husband's band paid $800 for their last promo shoot and they got 5 images. A group shot, and an individual shot for each member. That was it. They had posters made, but again, they had to *pay extra* for that use.

So again, I know I sound like a broken recored but... what does the contract say?

Marshall21 · Feb 27, 2011

Thank you so much for your response E.rose. I really appreciate it. And thank you for sharing your experience.

Before I gave him cash, I said I wanted a CD with all images plus 6 retouched images.
And he wrote that in his handwriting and signed it. and gave me the promissory note.

"The note says, that I have paid in full and that he will give me a CD with all images plus 6 retouched images.
There is nothing about that I can only use 6."

Now he says I will give you a CD with all images, but you can use only 6 retouched and that's it. Otherwise he said I will be violating with law.
He did not say it before. He took the money. In fact I stated that I can do my own retouching so I just need as many images as possible.

I have contacted him and said that in that case I just want the money back.
But he said he will not give me the money back.

Thanks again.
Although it seems like your husband paid a lot for 5 images.

Usually when I worked with photographers, they gave me a CD, and I was able to post images on my myspace or facebook, and they were fine with it.

bigtwinky · Feb 27, 2011

Well, I did have something typed, but I then noticed you put a link to your music? Seriously? Coming here asking for legal advice from novice photographers and THEN pimping your music? That's pretty lame.

Looks like he took you for a ride. No mention of usage rights of the image. He is an amature who took advantage of someone
Call a lawyer, no one here is one.

Bitter Jeweler · Feb 27, 2011

Yeah, you'd be better served by taking your contract to a lawyer for advice, than coming here.
We can only take wild guesses, not reading the original contract.

But yes, a photographer does hold copyright, and can give you specific license to use the image in a specific way. It can be highly restrictive or rather generous, as defined by the contract.

Good luck!

Marshall21 · Feb 27, 2011

Hey Bigtwinky, I am sorry about that, I am not here to promote my music. I just wanted to be honest with who I am, and no one knows me on the forum, I will try to erase the link!

the reason I posted that, I wanted to show that I am just an indie musician.
I did not want to hide behind the screen name.

But I will try to edit my post and take the link down!

Thank you
for your advice! This means a lot to me coming from professional photographers. I am not familiar with the rules of what is the norm in photography.
That's why I needed advice.

M

e.rose · Feb 27, 2011

Marshall21 said:
Although it seems like your husband paid a lot for 5 images.

Usually when I worked with photographers, they gave me a CD, and I was able to post images on my myspace or facebook, and they were fine with it.

What my husband's band paid for 5 images is actually pretty average. You, as a musician, or them as a band, are not "regular" customers. You images aren't just going to be hung above the fireplace mantel for your family to see. The images you all receive as musicians, are for the purpose of promoting yourselves and, if you're using them on merch, for profit... therefore making the photographer's involvement with you more along the lines of commercial photography... not retail, which is why it's expensive. You benefit financially (and long term) from the photographer's images... why shouldn't the photographer?

Based on your description above, I'm assuming there was no *actual* contract involved then? Well that was a mistake on BOTH of your parts, if that was the case. I don't know that the "promissory note" you had him sign will hold up in court for either of you... but I'm not a lawyer so who knows which way it'll go.

I would say if you're unhappy with the services, then give him the images back, ask for your money back, and point out that there was no contract involved, save the promissory note that he failed to follow... and hire another photographer.

And with *that* photographer, make sure it's CLEAR to them what you want... and make sure a contract is signed.

But I'm telling you now... to find a *decent* photographer that's willing to give you *all* images on a disk... is probably going to cost you.

e.rose · Feb 27, 2011

Marshall21 said:
I am just an indie musician.

I still want to know what this has to do with anything. :lol:

bigtwinky · Feb 27, 2011

I would say 95% of people don't know.

The person who does know is a lawyer.

It is sad that he took you for a ride. But if the contact says you get 6 images for myspace, and the 6images he gave you work on myspace with good resolution, then that's it, he fulfilled his side. Its up to you to properly validate what you are getting. If you go with random guy on craigslist, this type of **** happens. If he was a true pro, he would of made things like usage rights and what not way clearer.

When I tell someone facebook images, they are properly sized and ready for facebook. So yes, if you zoom in you will see pixels, but you won't on facebook.

So again... without knowing the contract, hard to tell. Bring it to a lawyer to check your rights.

No one here is a lawyer. Not many here are working pros either.

You are fishing in the wrong pond

JG_Coleman · Feb 27, 2011

Marshall21 said:
Before I gave him cash, I said I wanted a CD with all images plus 6 retouched images.
And he wrote that in his handwriting and signed it. and gave me the promissory note.

"The note says, that I have paid in full and that he will give me a CD with all images plus 6 retouched images.
There is nothing about that I can only use 6."

Well... you sort of screwed yourself here, man. Just because you get to own a CD with photos on it doesn't mean you own all rights to the photos. Likewise, if I own a copy of one of your albums, that doesn't give me total rights to use your songs in any way I please, right? In fact, it doesn't mean I can do anything but listen to them for my own personal enjoyment... period. So, the problem is that you didn't discuss what rights you would have to the photos, and you were duped into thinking that you'd have full rights of the photos he gave you. Judging by your explanation... your "contract", if it can even be called that, doesn't guarantee you any rights at all.

I'm no lawyer... but I wouldn't have forked over that sort of cash without an ACTUAL contract. We live in a litigious world... you need everything clearly written out.

Marshall21 said:
Now he says I will give you a CD with all images, but you can use only 6 retouched and that's it. Otherwise he said I will be violating with law.
He did not say it before. He took the money. In fact I stated that I can do my own retouching so I just need as many images as possible.

Not that I'm necessarily defending him, but many photographers don't want anything but their best shots getting shown to the world at large. It sounds like he chose the 6 shots that he felt were the best... the rest he considered "second-best". If somebody were to see one of his shots that don't make the cut, they'd potentially get the wrong impression of his work and assume that those second-rate shots are the actual work he produces.

Marshall21 said:
I have contacted him and said that in that case I just want the money back.
But he said he will not give me the money back.

I'm not telling you not to contact a lawyer, but at this point, I really wonder if it would even be profitable for you to spend time and money on a lawyer. It would seem that at the end of the day, you'll pay trying to fight it. But hey, give it a shot if you want.

Above all, learn a lesson from this crappy experience... get a REAL contract next time and ensure you know exactly what type of rights you'll have for every photo you get.

xjoewhitex · Feb 27, 2011

In any deal like this you should have a full contract written out and signed before you shoot, so both party's can agree on exactly what it is you are paying for. The photographer always owns the copyright that is unless he is working for someone other than himself. Anyways, the contract you signed said he was going to give you a disc of all the images, plus 6 retouched. Catch, It doesn't say anything about releasing copyright to anyone so he has you. Contact a lawyer if its worth it, or just take the loss and use the 6 if you are even allowed to do that.