Need help ASAP

[mjrose514]

I'm not sure if this is the right forum so feel free to move if it's not, but I have a question I need answered quickly as something just came up.

If someone, say photographer A was hired to do a wedding and hired photographer B to help out and photograph knowing that only Photographer A would be able to sell the photographs, who owns the copyright to photographer B's images? Is photographer B allowed to use the images in their portfolio as long as they're not trying to sell the images?
thanks

 

[AdrianC]

Without a contract, photog B would own the pics.

 

[KmH]

It's not quite as cut and dried as Adrian C might lead you to believe, and it also depends entirely where on planet Earth you are.

You don't say in your profile what country you are in, and TPF has members from all over the world.

Your question, as it is currently written, cannot be answered because of a lack of information.

In the USA, copyright ownership would hinge on the terms of photographer B's employment. Those terms would determine if photographer B is an independant contractor, or not.

If you are in the USA, you might be helped by exploring the legal copyright concept of 'work for hire' at www.copyright.gov.

 

[AdrianC]

Well as I said, if there is no contract, then photog B would technically own the pictures. Now he would need model releases if he wanted to make money off of them, but thats another story.

If there is a contract, what you said applies.

 

[mjrose514]

oh sorry Keith I am US. I am photog B and was helping out a "friend" who was photographing her first wedding. I have only posted the pics from this wedding in these forums, on my blog and a non selling gallery on my site and only AFTER the main photog gave the bride the images, but evidently the bride is saying I don't own copyright, but I'd NEVER giver over copyright especially not at the price I did it for. thanks for the link i'll check it out.

 

[mjrose514]

oh and bc it was a "friend" there was no contract written just verbal and it was how much I'd do it for and that I'd give a copy of all files for her to edit and of course I wouldn't try and sell them (I would never do that, that's just wrong). and yes I have learned my lesson and I'm sick of "friend's" taking advantage.

 

[KmH]

I'm sorry but copyright laws vary by country. If you won't say what country you are in, no one can help answer your question.

This, by Adrian C, "Now he would need model releases if he wanted to make money off of them...", is not a true statement here in the USA, but is certainly urban legend all over the Internet.

 

[Big Mike]

oh sorry Keith I am US.

As far as I understand it. Unless there is a contract or something, that says that you are passing over the copyright, then you should still own it.
However, I believe there is a 'work for hire' issue, where the employer may own the rights of works created by the employee, if that's what they were paid to do. But I don't know if that is something that has to be specifically written into a contract.

Best to get this info from an official source or a lawyer etc.

 

[mjrose514]

thanks all It's been resolved I do own my copyright I guess bc they're so new to this they didn't know the right terminology. Thanks for all the help.

 

[Robert Pope]

Work for hire (in the U.S.) would only be enforced if photographer B was employed by the business and the business were paying appropriate payroll taxes, etc.

This falls under rules for "Independent Contractor" which, as was pointed out, would fall back to contract.