Right on..... well explained. 90% of people have those incorrect assumptions ...I have experienced hostility in the real world, a realtor or interior decorator thinks in their head that they "own" the images if they are paying you to take the photographs. If you tell them that you, the photographer, will always be the owner of those images and license them for usage, they will either laugh at you and say we'll find someone else or they will want the deal made to where they take ownership of the images... in which case that , too, can be arranged for a certain price. If they want a buy-out, then I delete the image files from my computer or HDD after they are sold and delivered. But they pay a pretty price for a complete buy-out
I can't even begin to express how much you have helped me during my journey in the interior photography world. I have learned so much from your tutorials, I absolutely love listening to you break down your thought process when shooting/editing. It's like I am getting to shadow a photographer, something I haven't been able to experience where I am. Truly, Thank you!!
This cleared up a lot of confusion for me as a voice actor. I always knew that rights affected us, but if you change out the word "photo" or "image" for "recording," almost all of it applies straight across. Thanks so much for this.
As a food content creator, you've explained this so, so well! I usually create videos and do shots for my thumbnails, but now a brand is asking to use those shots as part of their in-store signage. I was confused about copyright and licensing till I encountered this particular video. HUGE THANKS!
Every photographer should HAVE to watch this video. Mandatory viewing for anyone looking to make money off of their photography or videography work. This is essential education most folks just do not have. And, we all pay for it, for lack of a better word, because ignorance is driving all of our rates lower.
12:00 *Copyright Registration:* To receive the *FULLEST/STRONGEST* legal protection against non-Fair Use copyright infringers, your photographs MUST(!) be *“timely”* registered with the US Copyright Office, *either* BEFORE the infringement begins *or* registered WITHIN three-months of their “first-publication date” (typically the day you start selling/listing, licensing, sharing, or the day you deliver your images to a client or to stock or to make your images available for further distribution). See the federal copyright statutes: 17 USC § 412 (Registration as prerequisite to certain remedies for infringement) + 17 USC § 504 (Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits) + 17 USC § 505 (Remedies for infringement: Costs and attorney’s fees). If you miss those two window opportunities to register, you can ONLY pursue “actual damages” (typically the missed licensing fee you should have received, and that tends to be LOW vs. the infringement dollar amount) and the disgorgement of unlawful profits the infringer made (if any). If you didn’t timely register, but your “actual damages" and/or infringer’s profits are SUBSTANTIAL and provable, like the infringer exploited your photographs in a pricey media buy, prominently displaying it in its advertising campaign, on a (Campbell) soup can, on apparel/merchandise, and in other commercial media, then your copyright infringement damages would be worth pursuing. As a general rule, infringed photographs not timely registered are NOT enforceable for money damages, as any out-of-court settlement or trial verdict will NOT cover your attorney fees - making it un-economical to pursue copyright infringers. Joshua Kaufman, a NYC copyright attorney/litigator, sums up (timely) copyright registration in the first 20-seconds of his short video: ua-cam.com/video/cBOKkrleY3Y/v-deo.html
Amazing and perfect explanation of copyright. Thanks so much, I will be passing this along to my clients who have questions about copyright and image usage.
This is Wonderful, From now on, I will send this to my future clients. You have explained this perfectly. Because people don't know, doesn't give them a right to make you think you're wrong.
Where the argument falls short about bringing music licensing into the argument is quite different. Here is the difference and right comparison. A musician goes into the recording studio pays for time to record the song, but the studio doesn't own the mater copy. Yet, you pay a photographer, and they own the master yet being paid up from. As a musician, you pay the studio up front and own the master recording
This was so well explained. I'm considering putting together a handout to give to clients or potential clients and I think I might include a link to your video on this and copyright because you do such a fantastic job of explaining it because I plan to work with a lot of small businesses or artists who may have never hired a photographer for branding images before and these video feel way more approachable than me as the photographer trying to explain it to them when they have no base knowledge.
A valuable video presented in a very eloquent way thank you. I think most pros are aware of this but struggle to put it into practice effectively. Perhaps a good follow up would showcase how to use this in the real world in differing projects.
Hey Matthew, I totally understand and agree about licensing. My question is how do I actually keep track of every single license I put out. I could have 30 or more license for EVERY year. I don't have time to read through each one and determine if someone's license is out of date. Then contact them, emails and phone numbers change all the time. Then tell them they need to pay up or take down the photo. How do you keep up with this and be tactful, etc.
I'd suggest using some kind of CRM or accounting software. At the very least, set reminders on your phone if/when certain licenses will expire. Honestly though, most of the licenses I write are in perpetuity so I don't have to worry a whole lot about tracking expirations.
Thanks for breaking it down!!! I just started working for a real estate photography business and this video really explains what I need to know. But how does a photography know how much to charge for permission to use images?? Is there another video lol?? Recently TMZ used our images of ARod's home for a story. They listed our company name under the photos but they never asked for permission or paid???
With all this in mind, how does something like Envato Elements work with this? I use elements all the time, and it's a pretty fast and loose license. What are your thoughts about stock sites like this, and how does it affect your industry (if at all)?
Hello matthew, first off all thank you for this knowledge i had lot of doubts in my mind and i was not able to get proper answers thanks to this video i was able to understand a lot about photo licensing. i have a one doubt related to collaboration shoot were its unpaid. make up artist ,model, designer, photographers work on collaboration to achieve there respective goals. i understand we need release form from model. 1)do we have to take some release form sign from makeup artist and designer. 2) or do we have to license the images for them to use stating our conditions ,as a photographer i have faced some issues like they remove the watermark, they re-edit , use it for posters for promoting there business etc.... it will really help me if u can give me a bit of knowledge regarding this question. once again thank you so much 🙂
Fantastic explanation of this. What about cases when hired to photograph sports and then a third party subsequently wants to use an image in their advertising? What additional considerations are necessary? Does the photographer now need a release from that athlete? Does the license agreement now need to factor in fees for that athlete?
I put most of what I say in the video in this article on APAlmanac. That may help. apalmanac.com/business/photo-licensing-101-the-basics-explained-176320
That's like asking "how long is a piece of string?" A lot of variables to consider when licensing. Mike Kelley and I created a video about licensing specifically. apalmanac.com/product/licensing-your-photography-the-business-of-architecture-photography
Say, I hire a second photographer to help me out for a shoot for a client. Im guessing I would have to write in my contract that the photos shot by the 2nd photographer are MY copyrighted images.
When you say protected your images against copyright infringement what do you mean? In my case I did some shots of a product they wanted me to post on my social media. I did that then they asked for the images and I said they could post them on their Instagram account but nothing else. I took a look at their website the other day and they used them on there which I didn’t think they could do? Any thoughts? I feel like I need some standard terms and conditions of usage drafted or something?
Matt H wrote, “When you say protected your images against copyright infringement what do you mean?” To best legally protect your photographs against copyright infringers, you should “timely” (IMMEDIATELY) register your images with the US Copyright Office (USCO). Photographs not timely registered are typically NOT enforceable for money damages. To have a timely copyright registration, register your photographs either BEFORE the infringements begin or registered WITHIN three-month of their first-publication date (the day you list, license, sell, share/distribute, or deliver your images to clients or stock). You also help “presumptively” PROVE your photo copyright creation & copyright ownership claims by quickly registering your photographs with the USCO. It’s not necessarily your RAW or original files that proves your copyright authorship, but rather your issued US copyright “Certificate of Registration” - it will include the official US government date stamp of your registered photo copyright claim. Watch the first 20-seconds of Joshua Kaufman, a Washington, DC copyright attorney litigator, summarize copyright registration; Joshua also addresses the economics of NOT timely registering your works: ua-cam.com/video/cBOKkrleY3Y/v-deo.html Matt H wrote, “I did some shots of a product they wanted me to post on my social media. I did that then they asked for the images and I said they could post them on their Instagram account but nothing else. I took a look at their website the other day and they used them on there which I didn’t think they could do? Any thoughts? I feel like I need some standard terms and conditions of usage drafted or something?” ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS secure your photography assignments and stock licenses with a signed/dated agreement. If they won’t sign your agreement for whatever reason, walk away! Your agreement needs to address who are the clients; what type of photography you’re doing; how long will the client get to use/exploit your photographs; that you solely and exclusively own the photo copyrights (not them!); list your photo or licensing fee, and note when you’ll get paid; try and get them to list your copyright attribution with your URL and/or social media handle; and other things. Many copyright attorneys sell contract/assignment templates (a good investment). Send me a reply for some of those links. If you only had a verbal agreement, you may have limited recourse. You could first contact the client and explain your concerns. If you’re not satisfied with their response, you could visit with a copyright attorney to get legal advice on how to proceed, if at all. Send me a reply if you need copyright attorney links. *SUMMARY: If you’re a photographer who enjoys having headaches and problems in life, don’t get things in writing and skip registering (protecting) your photo copyrights with the USCO!*
As a designer, I fully understand copyright, however, what I don't understand is that the photographer gets full license to my design and distributing photos of it because they have copyright permissions. Maybe not a popular opinion, but I think that these contracts need to go both ways. The photographer needs to have license from the designer to use the photographs of the designers' work just as much as the designer needs to pay for a license to use the photographer's work... because what about the designer's copyright law and intellectual property?? I don't ever want to find that a photographer sold photos of my work as stock photography or on a manufacturer's website without my own business and livelihood getting at least recognition for that work. And, I'm not sure I understand why we can use photos on our website and our own media, but not for a competition - is that not our marketing?
Many (but clearly not all) contests are a vehicle for businesses and organizations to snatch up free image rights and content. The fine print and wording of some of these contests are pretty egregious in what they're asking for under the guise of "exposure" for designers, builders, etc. That's why some photographers don't automatically include use for contests in their boilerplate license. They're not completely against the idea of their images being used in contests...they would just prefer to review each one on a case by cases basis. As far as your initial question/scenario goes...the photographer doesn't have rights to a design. They have ownership and rights to their intellectual property. In this case, a photo or set of photos. While a photographer may have the legal RIGHT to license images out to additional parties, some of it does come down to ethics. Personally, I've never licensed a single image to a stock photo site simply for making a few bucks. Outside of the commissioning client, any other parties who've licensed images were involved with that project one way or another. And typically, conversations about this are discussed with clients up front so there are no surprises. Clear and open communications seems to diffuse a lot of issues 😉(and yes that burden lands more on the shoulders of the photographer) Music can sometimes be a comparison that helps to understand things a little better. If a person creates a song where the lyrics describe a living room you've designed in great detail, the songwriter is still the copyright owner of that song. Copyright and licensing standards between music and photos are very similar.
@@MatthewAPhoto I guess my suggestion as it pertains to the license, is that the photographer contract needs to protect the designer as well, and photographers also need to provide credit when posting as well as request permission to sell photos of their client's work. As the musician who commented previously stated, the musician goes in for a recording, but the studio doesn't get rights to their recording - the recording is done and the musician or their label have the rights. I have run into challenges with the photographer taking three months to reply to publishers who want to publish our work. We need to have just as much of a license and protection as the photographer. I do not ever want to be on the hook for a non-responsive photographer when I'm requesting licensure to publish, as I have been. So, I think contracts need to have certain requirements, such as the photographer needs to provide photos within x timeline, and no response from the photographer after x days when requesting publication permissions automatically grants permission. I imagine you are very ethical and very considerate, but not all photographers are, which is why awesome photographers like you could take advantage of this and set a precedent in these agreements. It's not like we can go photograph again - we're intruding on someone's home and putting a lot of time and money into making sure it's perfect. So, we need to be careful to protect the designer's interests just as strongly as the well-deserved photographer's. It's so rough on us sometimes, that many designers end up getting photography training, and we really want to love and trust our photographers!
3:58: In your assignment agreements, include the following provision: *NO “transfer of rights” to third-parties!* Your (real estate) client can NOT give, share, or transfer its rights to others, including the architect, kitchen counter-top manufacturer, and others. Those parties need to contact you to obtain their own photo license/s. If you’re licensing your assignment or stock images to clients and others, make sure they are *“timely”* registered with the US Copyright Office, as that will help you *ENFORCE* your copyrights against non-Fair Use infringers for money damages & possibly payment of your attorney fees + legal costs.
@@robertdimartino5794 wrote, “Why do you need to file a copyright for every image. I thought once you take the image it is automatically your intellectual property. No other steps necessary.” US copyright law grants authors/creatives an immediate & automatic copyright upon creating a work of authorship or taking a selfie and other types of photographs. Unfortunately, automatic copyright protection is, too often, legally WORTHLESS and not really enforceable for money damages. To have the right (“legal standing”) to sue copyright infringers in federal court (notwithstanding the small-claims-copyright court/tribunal - Copyright Claims Board; see www.CCB.gov), you MUST register your photograph/s with the US Copyright Office (USCO). The US copyright registration system is very much a vetting process to help *“authenticate”* your photo copyright validity. The last time I checked, about 5% of all works submitted for copyright registration were not copyrightable and rejected by the USCO. It’s NOT necessarily about having a RAW or original file in possession that proves your copyright creation, but rather it’s your issued copyright *“Certificate of Registration”* that the US Copyright Office will mail you. Your Certificate (or the USCO’s refusal letter to register your photographs) is what a federal judge MUST see for you to have legal standing to bring an infringement case into federal court. By quickly registering your photographs, either as an unpublished work or registered within five-years of first-publication, you’re STATUTORILY granted *“presumptive legal proof”* of your copyright claim (see 17 USC § 410(c)). Your Certificate will include your “effective date of registration,” the official US government date stamp of your registered photo copyright claim. When someone challenges my copyright creation, I show them my Certificate’s registration number (not my RAW files), and that usually shuts them up. If you’re able to register your photographs even MORE QUICKLY, you get additional legal protection/enforcement: If your photograph/s was *“timely”* registered (registered BEFORE the infringement began or WITHIN three-month of its first-publication date), you attorney will have the necessary LEVERAGE to push non-Fair Use copyright infringers to settle out of court; otherwise, (post-trial) they are liable for statutory damages from $750 to $30,000 and up to $150,000 for willful copyright infringement AND your attorney fees AND legal costs (at the court’s discretion). See 17 USC § 504 (Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits) & 17 USC § 505 (Remedies for infringement: Costs and attorney’s fees). If you miss either of these two very time-sensitive windows to register, you can ONLY pursue *“actual damages,”* typically the missed licensing fee you would have charged and/or the number of copies the infringer made (these are usually LOW fees), and the “disgorgement of profits” the infringer made (IF ANY!) from reproducing your work. Importantly, you’re responsible for your attorney fees and other legal costs! *So, unless you’re a millionaire or your actual damages + the infringer’s unlawful profits are SUBSTANTIAL, the costs to litigate post-trial and/or negotiate an out of court settlement will NOT likely cover your attorney fees, making it un-economical to pursue US-based copyright infringers without securing a timely registered copyright claim.* According to an American Intellectual Property Law Association report (2019 Report of the Economic Survey, at I-208, 2019, www.aipla.org/detail/journal-issue/2019-report-of-the-economic-survey -- pay wall???), the average cost to litigate a copyright infringement dispute is $397,000. I believe the 2022 number is over $500K. To mitigate their financial exposure & legal liability (including receiving bad media press and/or social media negative commentary), most all US-based, non-judgement-proof copyright infringers who are facing a timely registered copyright claim and whose use does not fall within the scope of Fair Use will want to confidentially settle out of court and put their infringing actions behind them. In fact, something like 98% or more of all US copyright infringement disputes settle out of court. Because the cost to litigate can be EXORBITANT, it’s rare to see a US copyright action be adjudicated through trial. If you contact a US copyright litigator to pursue money damages against an infringer, his/her first, second, or third question to you will be: “Robert, did you ‘timely’ register your photograph/s with the USCO?” I hope you answer, “yes!” Still don’t believe me about timely registering your copyrights? Then watch the first 20-seconds of Joshua Kaufman, a Washington, DC copyright attorney litigator, summarize copyright registration; Joshua also addresses the economics of NOT timely registering your works: ua-cam.com/video/cBOKkrleY3Y/v-deo.html If you choose not to (timely) register your photographs, you should, at the very least, affix them with watermark/s, logos, metadata, copyright attributions, licensing information, and/or other *“Copyright Management Information”* (CMI). Non-Fair-Use copyright infringers who knowingly remove, change, or cover up CMI to hide their copyright infringing actions OR encourage others to infringe can be liable for your actual damages & lost profits OR statutory damages from $2,500 to $25,000 PLUS your attorney fees & costs (at the court’s discretion). Intentionally removing/changing CMI can suggest “willful” copyright infringement, and if the work was timely registered, infringers can now be liable for $150,000 in statutory damages. Good news: An infringed work does NOT need to be timely registered to pursue CMI violators. See www.photolaw.net/did-someone-remove-the-copyright-notice-from-your-photograph.html
Pretty simple- selling to magazines publishers it's per layout of photos for exclusive 1st rights for a year, then you sell the 2nd rights to a different publisher or whomever will buy them, then 3rd rights etc.. everybody in mag. publishing has set rates & budgets per issue, and the photographer owns the rights as soon as photo is shot in camera.
It’s the Best Presentation on Copyright I have ever Seen!
Right on..... well explained. 90% of people have those incorrect assumptions ...I have experienced hostility in the real world, a realtor or interior decorator thinks in their head that they "own" the images if they are paying you to take the photographs. If you tell them that you, the photographer, will always be the owner of those images and license them for usage, they will either laugh at you and say we'll find someone else or they will want the deal made to where they take ownership of the images... in which case that , too, can be arranged for a certain price. If they want a buy-out, then I delete the image files from my computer or HDD after they are sold and delivered. But they pay a pretty price for a complete buy-out
So true
I can't even begin to express how much you have helped me during my journey in the interior photography world. I have learned so much from your tutorials, I absolutely love listening to you break down your thought process when shooting/editing. It's like I am getting to shadow a photographer, something I haven't been able to experience where I am. Truly, Thank you!!
This cleared up a lot of confusion for me as a voice actor. I always knew that rights affected us, but if you change out the word "photo" or "image" for "recording," almost all of it applies straight across. Thanks so much for this.
As a food content creator, you've explained this so, so well! I usually create videos and do shots for my thumbnails, but now a brand is asking to use those shots as part of their in-store signage. I was confused about copyright and licensing till I encountered this particular video. HUGE THANKS!
Well stated. Would love a video on how to price the licensing of work.
Every photographer should HAVE to watch this video. Mandatory viewing for anyone looking to make money off of their photography or videography work. This is essential education most folks just do not have. And, we all pay for it, for lack of a better word, because ignorance is driving all of our rates lower.
12:00 *Copyright Registration:* To receive the *FULLEST/STRONGEST* legal protection against non-Fair Use copyright infringers, your photographs MUST(!) be *“timely”* registered with the US Copyright Office, *either* BEFORE the infringement begins *or* registered WITHIN three-months of their “first-publication date” (typically the day you start selling/listing, licensing, sharing, or the day you deliver your images to a client or to stock or to make your images available for further distribution).
See the federal copyright statutes: 17 USC § 412 (Registration as prerequisite to certain remedies for infringement) + 17 USC § 504 (Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits) + 17 USC § 505 (Remedies for infringement: Costs and attorney’s fees).
If you miss those two window opportunities to register, you can ONLY pursue “actual damages” (typically the missed licensing fee you should have received, and that tends to be LOW vs. the infringement dollar amount) and the disgorgement of unlawful profits the infringer made (if any).
If you didn’t timely register, but your “actual damages" and/or infringer’s profits are SUBSTANTIAL and provable, like the infringer exploited your photographs in a pricey media buy, prominently displaying it in its advertising campaign, on a (Campbell) soup can, on apparel/merchandise, and in other commercial media, then your copyright infringement damages would be worth pursuing.
As a general rule, infringed photographs not timely registered are NOT enforceable for money damages, as any out-of-court settlement or trial verdict will NOT cover your attorney fees - making it un-economical to pursue copyright infringers.
Joshua Kaufman, a NYC copyright attorney/litigator, sums up (timely) copyright registration in the first 20-seconds of his short video: ua-cam.com/video/cBOKkrleY3Y/v-deo.html
Amazing and perfect explanation of copyright. Thanks so much, I will be passing this along to my clients who have questions about copyright and image usage.
Great video, Matthew, well explained! Especially on social media nowadays people seem to have no understanding of copyright laws.
This is Wonderful, From now on, I will send this to my future clients. You have explained this perfectly. Because people don't know, doesn't give them a right to make you think you're wrong.
Thanks Matt - this keeps happening to me! A magazine keeps using my photos without permission. I’ll refer them to this video :)
yeah, I feel you...get a lawyer on it... see how things quickly move along in your favor...best of luck..
Where the argument falls short about bringing music licensing into the argument is quite different.
Here is the difference and right comparison. A musician goes into the recording studio pays for time to record the song, but the studio doesn't own the mater copy. Yet, you pay a photographer, and they own the master yet being paid up from. As a musician, you pay the studio up front and own the master recording
Great work Matt! This is so important and you really nailed it in a clear and understandable way!
This was so well explained. I'm considering putting together a handout to give to clients or potential clients and I think I might include a link to your video on this and copyright because you do such a fantastic job of explaining it because I plan to work with a lot of small businesses or artists who may have never hired a photographer for branding images before and these video feel way more approachable than me as the photographer trying to explain it to them when they have no base knowledge.
I don't know how to Thank You for all the info that you gathered and the way you presented about the photo Licensing!
Matthew Anderson: *Real nice overview of photography licensing!*
Great video !! so informative and necessary to make clients understand the usage of our work. Thank you !! Kind regards, Jose
This is a great video, thanks for sharing!
A valuable video presented in a very eloquent way thank you. I think most pros are aware of this but struggle to put it into practice effectively. Perhaps a good follow up would showcase how to use this in the real world in differing projects.
Excellent explanation! Saving this video to my favorites to share with clients! Well done!👍
Great topics covered here and I'm glad to see this on the internet. :)
So good man! Great video. Make sure to post on IG so everyone can share on their stories!!!
This was SO helpful. This subject is so confusing and you made it so easy to understand. Thank you!
You’re very welcome Mary. I’m glad it helped 🙂
LOVE the off script part at the end. I'm constantly asking "why are us as the photographers, always made out to be the asshole?"
Hey Matthew, I totally understand and agree about licensing. My question is how do I actually keep track of every single license I put out. I could have 30 or more license for EVERY year. I don't have time to read through each one and determine if someone's license is out of date. Then contact them, emails and phone numbers change all the time. Then tell them they need to pay up or take down the photo. How do you keep up with this and be tactful, etc.
I'd suggest using some kind of CRM or accounting software. At the very least, set reminders on your phone if/when certain licenses will expire. Honestly though, most of the licenses I write are in perpetuity so I don't have to worry a whole lot about tracking expirations.
Thanks for breaking it down!!! I just started working for a real estate photography business and this video really explains what I need to know. But how does a photography know how much to charge for permission to use images?? Is there another video lol?? Recently TMZ used our images of ARod's home for a story. They listed our company name under the photos but they never asked for permission or paid???
Great video Matt! Highly informative
Right on! Thanks for this.
and I watermark TF out of my images I post on Social media....it never comes off until someone pays a license
With all this in mind, how does something like Envato Elements work with this? I use elements all the time, and it's a pretty fast and loose license. What are your thoughts about stock sites like this, and how does it affect your industry (if at all)?
So well said Matt, great video!
What about model releases; wouldn't their likeness be a factor in copyright as well?
If you replaced the word photos with the word videos in this video, does this explanation cover video similarly?
Hello matthew, first off all thank you for this knowledge i had lot of doubts in my mind and i was not able to get proper answers thanks to this video i was able to understand a lot about photo licensing. i have a one doubt related to collaboration shoot were its unpaid. make up artist ,model, designer, photographers work on collaboration to achieve there respective goals. i understand we need release form from model. 1)do we have to take some release form sign from makeup artist and designer. 2) or do we have to license the images for them to use stating our conditions ,as a photographer i have faced some issues like they remove the watermark, they re-edit , use it for posters for promoting there business etc.... it will really help me if u can give me a bit of knowledge regarding this question. once again thank you so much 🙂
This is great Information! Thank you!
how long should i give permission for real estate photos use ,1 year ? or do i not put a time limit
Fantastic explanation of this. What about cases when hired to photograph sports and then a third party subsequently wants to use an image in their advertising? What additional considerations are necessary? Does the photographer now need a release from that athlete? Does the license agreement now need to factor in fees for that athlete?
I think a lot of this depends on the terms and conditions between you and the original client who hired you.
@@MatthewAPhoto thank you for your feedback.
This is awesome. Thanks for sharing!
Do you have to be registered for this to stand up in court, if I’m not an official business yet will I still need this?
Thank you!
This is great! Would love to see this in a FAQ to send out to our clients.
I put most of what I say in the video in this article on APAlmanac. That may help. apalmanac.com/business/photo-licensing-101-the-basics-explained-176320
@@MatthewAPhoto This is perfect! Thanks so much!
Thank so much for the value video I’m real estate photography how much do you think you should charge the client for a license?
That's like asking "how long is a piece of string?" A lot of variables to consider when licensing. Mike Kelley and I created a video about licensing specifically. apalmanac.com/product/licensing-your-photography-the-business-of-architecture-photography
If 3rd parties use your image to promote THEIR business they have to pay period. Very well explained
David Deal is an amazing copyright attorney. Works on contingency, no matter how small. Register your photos people
I would like to sell floral stock photography. Should I get my photos and videos copyrighted, before submitting them to the stock companies ?
Well said! Thanks a lot!
But how do I sell a monthly license??
Say, I hire a second photographer to help me out for a shoot for a client. Im guessing I would have to write in my contract that the photos shot by the 2nd photographer are MY copyrighted images.
Great fucking video.
When you say protected your images against copyright infringement what do you mean?
In my case I did some shots of a product they wanted me to post on my social media. I did that then they asked for the images and I said they could post them on their Instagram account but nothing else.
I took a look at their website the other day and they used them on there which I didn’t think they could do?
Any thoughts?
I feel like I need some standard terms and conditions of usage drafted or something?
Matt H wrote, “When you say protected your images against copyright infringement what do you mean?”
To best legally protect your photographs against copyright infringers, you should “timely” (IMMEDIATELY) register your images with the US Copyright Office (USCO). Photographs not timely registered are typically NOT enforceable for money damages.
To have a timely copyright registration, register your photographs either BEFORE the infringements begin or registered WITHIN three-month of their first-publication date (the day you list, license, sell, share/distribute, or deliver your images to clients or stock).
You also help “presumptively” PROVE your photo copyright creation & copyright ownership claims by quickly registering your photographs with the USCO. It’s not necessarily your RAW or original files that proves your copyright authorship, but rather your issued US copyright “Certificate of Registration” - it will include the official US government date stamp of your registered photo copyright claim.
Watch the first 20-seconds of Joshua Kaufman, a Washington, DC copyright attorney litigator, summarize copyright registration; Joshua also addresses the economics of NOT timely registering your works: ua-cam.com/video/cBOKkrleY3Y/v-deo.html
Matt H wrote, “I did some shots of a product they wanted me to post on my social media. I did that then they asked for the images and I said they could post them on their Instagram account but nothing else. I took a look at their website the other day and they used them on there which I didn’t think they could do? Any thoughts? I feel like I need some standard terms and conditions of usage drafted or something?”
ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS secure your photography assignments and stock licenses with a signed/dated agreement. If they won’t sign your agreement for whatever reason, walk away!
Your agreement needs to address who are the clients; what type of photography you’re doing; how long will the client get to use/exploit your photographs; that you solely and exclusively own the photo copyrights (not them!); list your photo or licensing fee, and note when you’ll get paid; try and get them to list your copyright attribution with your URL and/or social media handle; and other things. Many copyright attorneys sell contract/assignment templates (a good investment). Send me a reply for some of those links.
If you only had a verbal agreement, you may have limited recourse. You could first contact the client and explain your concerns. If you’re not satisfied with their response, you could visit with a copyright attorney to get legal advice on how to proceed, if at all. Send me a reply if you need copyright attorney links.
*SUMMARY: If you’re a photographer who enjoys having headaches and problems in life, don’t get things in writing and skip registering (protecting) your photo copyrights with the USCO!*
As a designer, I fully understand copyright, however, what I don't understand is that the photographer gets full license to my design and distributing photos of it because they have copyright permissions. Maybe not a popular opinion, but I think that these contracts need to go both ways. The photographer needs to have license from the designer to use the photographs of the designers' work just as much as the designer needs to pay for a license to use the photographer's work... because what about the designer's copyright law and intellectual property?? I don't ever want to find that a photographer sold photos of my work as stock photography or on a manufacturer's website without my own business and livelihood getting at least recognition for that work.
And, I'm not sure I understand why we can use photos on our website and our own media, but not for a competition - is that not our marketing?
Many (but clearly not all) contests are a vehicle for businesses and organizations to snatch up free image rights and content. The fine print and wording of some of these contests are pretty egregious in what they're asking for under the guise of "exposure" for designers, builders, etc. That's why some photographers don't automatically include use for contests in their boilerplate license. They're not completely against the idea of their images being used in contests...they would just prefer to review each one on a case by cases basis.
As far as your initial question/scenario goes...the photographer doesn't have rights to a design. They have ownership and rights to their intellectual property. In this case, a photo or set of photos. While a photographer may have the legal RIGHT to license images out to additional parties, some of it does come down to ethics. Personally, I've never licensed a single image to a stock photo site simply for making a few bucks. Outside of the commissioning client, any other parties who've licensed images were involved with that project one way or another. And typically, conversations about this are discussed with clients up front so there are no surprises. Clear and open communications seems to diffuse a lot of issues 😉(and yes that burden lands more on the shoulders of the photographer)
Music can sometimes be a comparison that helps to understand things a little better. If a person creates a song where the lyrics describe a living room you've designed in great detail, the songwriter is still the copyright owner of that song. Copyright and licensing standards between music and photos are very similar.
@@MatthewAPhoto I guess my suggestion as it pertains to the license, is that the photographer contract needs to protect the designer as well, and photographers also need to provide credit when posting as well as request permission to sell photos of their client's work. As the musician who commented previously stated, the musician goes in for a recording, but the studio doesn't get rights to their recording - the recording is done and the musician or their label have the rights.
I have run into challenges with the photographer taking three months to reply to publishers who want to publish our work. We need to have just as much of a license and protection as the photographer. I do not ever want to be on the hook for a non-responsive photographer when I'm requesting licensure to publish, as I have been. So, I think contracts need to have certain requirements, such as the photographer needs to provide photos within x timeline, and no response from the photographer after x days when requesting publication permissions automatically grants permission. I imagine you are very ethical and very considerate, but not all photographers are, which is why awesome photographers like you could take advantage of this and set a precedent in these agreements.
It's not like we can go photograph again - we're intruding on someone's home and putting a lot of time and money into making sure it's perfect. So, we need to be careful to protect the designer's interests just as strongly as the well-deserved photographer's. It's so rough on us sometimes, that many designers end up getting photography training, and we really want to love and trust our photographers!
What about in-house photographers? Who owns the copyright? 😊 cheers for all this information.
If a company/business has an in-house employed photographer, typically it’s the company that owns the copyright.
@@MatthewAPhoto thank you :-)
Can I embed this on my newsletter and/or blog?
Go for it! 👍
What about people that think they own the photo because of collaboratiins ? Im a photographer
3:58: In your assignment agreements, include the following provision: *NO “transfer of rights” to third-parties!* Your (real estate) client can NOT give, share, or transfer its rights to others, including the architect, kitchen counter-top manufacturer, and others. Those parties need to contact you to obtain their own photo license/s.
If you’re licensing your assignment or stock images to clients and others, make sure they are *“timely”* registered with the US Copyright Office, as that will help you *ENFORCE* your copyrights against non-Fair Use infringers for money damages & possibly payment of your attorney fees + legal costs.
@@robertdimartino5794 wrote, “Why do you need to file a copyright for every image. I thought once you take the image it is automatically your intellectual property. No other steps necessary.”
US copyright law grants authors/creatives an immediate & automatic copyright upon creating a work of authorship or taking a selfie and other types of photographs. Unfortunately, automatic copyright protection is, too often, legally WORTHLESS and not really enforceable for money damages.
To have the right (“legal standing”) to sue copyright infringers in federal court (notwithstanding the small-claims-copyright court/tribunal - Copyright Claims Board; see www.CCB.gov), you MUST register your photograph/s with the US Copyright Office (USCO).
The US copyright registration system is very much a vetting process to help *“authenticate”* your photo copyright validity. The last time I checked, about 5% of all works submitted for copyright registration were not copyrightable and rejected by the USCO.
It’s NOT necessarily about having a RAW or original file in possession that proves your copyright creation, but rather it’s your issued copyright *“Certificate of Registration”* that the US Copyright Office will mail you. Your Certificate (or the USCO’s refusal letter to register your photographs) is what a federal judge MUST see for you to have legal standing to bring an infringement case into federal court.
By quickly registering your photographs, either as an unpublished work or registered within five-years of first-publication, you’re STATUTORILY granted *“presumptive legal proof”* of your copyright claim (see 17 USC § 410(c)). Your Certificate will include your “effective date of registration,” the official US government date stamp of your registered photo copyright claim. When someone challenges my copyright creation, I show them my Certificate’s registration number (not my RAW files), and that usually shuts them up.
If you’re able to register your photographs even MORE QUICKLY, you get additional legal protection/enforcement: If your photograph/s was *“timely”* registered (registered BEFORE the infringement began or WITHIN three-month of its first-publication date), you attorney will have the necessary LEVERAGE to push non-Fair Use copyright infringers to settle out of court; otherwise, (post-trial) they are liable for statutory damages from $750 to $30,000 and up to $150,000 for willful copyright infringement AND your attorney fees AND legal costs (at the court’s discretion). See 17 USC § 504 (Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits) & 17 USC § 505 (Remedies for infringement: Costs and attorney’s fees).
If you miss either of these two very time-sensitive windows to register, you can ONLY pursue *“actual damages,”* typically the missed licensing fee you would have charged and/or the number of copies the infringer made (these are usually LOW fees), and the “disgorgement of profits” the infringer made (IF ANY!) from reproducing your work. Importantly, you’re responsible for your attorney fees and other legal costs!
*So, unless you’re a millionaire or your actual damages + the infringer’s unlawful profits are SUBSTANTIAL, the costs to litigate post-trial and/or negotiate an out of court settlement will NOT likely cover your attorney fees, making it un-economical to pursue US-based copyright infringers without securing a timely registered copyright claim.*
According to an American Intellectual Property Law Association report (2019 Report of the Economic Survey, at I-208, 2019, www.aipla.org/detail/journal-issue/2019-report-of-the-economic-survey -- pay wall???), the average cost to litigate a copyright infringement dispute is $397,000. I believe the 2022 number is over $500K.
To mitigate their financial exposure & legal liability (including receiving bad media press and/or social media negative commentary), most all US-based, non-judgement-proof copyright infringers who are facing a timely registered copyright claim and whose use does not fall within the scope of Fair Use will want to confidentially settle out of court and put their infringing actions behind them. In fact, something like 98% or more of all US copyright infringement disputes settle out of court. Because the cost to litigate can be EXORBITANT, it’s rare to see a US copyright action be adjudicated through trial.
If you contact a US copyright litigator to pursue money damages against an infringer, his/her first, second, or third question to you will be: “Robert, did you ‘timely’ register your photograph/s with the USCO?” I hope you answer, “yes!”
Still don’t believe me about timely registering your copyrights? Then watch the first 20-seconds of Joshua Kaufman, a Washington, DC copyright attorney litigator, summarize copyright registration; Joshua also addresses the economics of NOT timely registering your works: ua-cam.com/video/cBOKkrleY3Y/v-deo.html
If you choose not to (timely) register your photographs, you should, at the very least, affix them with watermark/s, logos, metadata, copyright attributions, licensing information, and/or other *“Copyright Management Information”* (CMI). Non-Fair-Use copyright infringers who knowingly remove, change, or cover up CMI to hide their copyright infringing actions OR encourage others to infringe can be liable for your actual damages & lost profits OR statutory damages from $2,500 to $25,000 PLUS your attorney fees & costs (at the court’s discretion). Intentionally removing/changing CMI can suggest “willful” copyright infringement, and if the work was timely registered, infringers can now be liable for $150,000 in statutory damages. Good news: An infringed work does NOT need to be timely registered to pursue CMI violators. See www.photolaw.net/did-someone-remove-the-copyright-notice-from-your-photograph.html
Thanks I wish all people understood we photographer's have to work hard please don't take my photos.
Pretty simple- selling to magazines publishers it's per layout of photos for exclusive 1st rights for a year, then you sell the 2nd rights to a different publisher or whomever will buy them, then 3rd rights etc.. everybody in mag. publishing has set rates & budgets per issue, and the photographer owns the rights as soon as photo is shot in camera.
Thank you!