Reminder Secure

second photographer copyright question

Rob Morris Photography is off-line
05 October 2014 05:58
rob25881
Photographer
rob25881
Location
United Kingdom
West Midlands
Telford

I recently helped another photographer out by acting as a second photographer at a wedding they were shooting, the understanding was that they would help me out as a second photographer at a later date.
I've since been sent a flyer by this photographer advertising their business with a lot of the photos that I took on the day -at the very least I feel this is a bit cheeky of them as the photos don't show their ability etc and were taken by someone else but the question I have is  - who owns the copyright on photos where you have acted as a second photographer at a wedding?
Are you classed as being "employed" by the main photographer even though no money exchanges hands for services, or is it a case of you still own the copyright of the photos you have taken?


Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.


Pict is off-line
05 October 2014 06:44
Pict
Photographer
Pict
Location
United Kingdom
Kent
Rochester

I'm sure someone will have the legal interpretation for you (which is really the important one) however my take on it from a practical point of view would be that you were tasked with providing a service to the other photographer. You wouldn't have been there otherwise and as such you have no claim unless you have something in writing to the contrary.
I also wouldn't see it as "cheeky" to use photos you took in their marketing material. It's not an advert to show their abilities rather what a bride might expect to receive on her wedding day.

Not really sure what you expected them to do when you handed over the photos????


G Jack B is off-line
05 October 2014 06:48
Plymjack
Photographer
Plymjack
Location
United Kingdom
Devon
Plymouth

Well I would agree you have no rights regarding copyright, as you were working for him, but I also agree its cheeky of the photographer to use your images and pass them off as his own, unless he is very clearly advertising as a "company" rather than as a photographer.
Real Bread Cook by day, BTL landlord & IT Guru - who said men can't multitask!


Andy Johnstone is off-line
05 October 2014 07:13
photomane9
Photographer
photomane9
Location
United Kingdom
London
Bexleyheath

You own the copyright. As you had no contract of employment you were not an employee so s 11(2) of the CDPA does not apply, and from your posting I assume you signed no agreement to transfer your right to the main photographer, so since assignments need to be in writing, the copyright remains yours. An argument which is sometimes made (and I think Pict may have had this in mind in his reply) is that the person who makes the arrangements for a shoot can sometimes be said to be the first owner of copyright. This argument was used extensiively in the Macaque monkey photograph debate. But the sort of decisions which make a photograph different from a photocopy, and therefore worthy of copyright  - the choice of angle, viewpoint, framing, lighting, focal distance, decisive moment etc - are all choices made by you, the photographer, in this case, not the person who got the commission from the client.
All of that being said, while I maintain that you own the copyright here, the circumstances of the agreement for you to act as second shooter make it likely that there was an implicit licence for the first shooter to use your images as part of the overall submission to the bride and groom. I suspect that you have not asserted your right under s 77 CDPA to be identified as the photographer, and so as long as the other photographer has not actually claimed that your images were taken by him (which would be contrary to s 84) then he has probably done anything which is actionable.


Bob is off-linePlatinum Member
05 October 2014 09:17
Bob
Photographer
Bob
Location
United Kingdom
Devon
Honiton

Quote from Pict
you have no claim unless you have something in writing to the contrary.


Wrong!
Quote from Plymjack
Well I would agree you have no rights regarding copyright


Wrong!
Quote from photomane9
You own the copyright. As you had...... then he has probably not done anything which is actionable.


Correct, except for the typo which I have corrected.

Bob




Andy Johnstone is off-line
05 October 2014 09:45
photomane9
Photographer
photomane9
Location
United Kingdom
London
Bexleyheath

Quote from Bob

Correct, except for the typo which I have corrected.

Bob





Whoops! Thanks Bob. My omissions checker isn't working properly today. 


Bob is off-linePlatinum Member
05 October 2014 09:48
Bob
Photographer
Bob
Location
United Kingdom
Devon
Honiton

Quote from photomane9
Whoops! Thanks Bob.


You're welcome.



G Jack B is off-line
05 October 2014 10:02
Plymjack
Photographer
Plymjack
Location
United Kingdom
Devon
Plymouth


Without details of the reciprocal arrangements outlined by the OP it is hard to know for sure, but given the OP clearly knew the "other photographer" was going to be selling them (as presumably you are going to be selling the ones he takes as your second photographer), you have given him the rights to do as he wishes (so yes you still have the copyright but since you have given him a "licence" to do as he wishes it serves no purpose to you).
Real Bread Cook by day, BTL landlord & IT Guru - who said men can't multitask!


Bob is off-linePlatinum Member
05 October 2014 10:39
Bob
Photographer
Bob
Location
United Kingdom
Devon
Honiton

Quote from Plymjack
Without details of the reciprocal arrangements ...


Stop digging a hole and trying to muddy the waters at the bottom.
Andy (photomane9) has answered Rob's question about who owns the copyright both succinctly and accurately.
Bob




Rob Morris Photography is off-line
05 October 2014 16:38
rob25881
Photographer
rob25881
Location
United Kingdom
West Midlands
Telford

Thank you all for your answers.
I have told the other photographer I wasn't too impressed to see them using my photo advertising their business (they are a self employed photographer) and the arrangement we had was that the photos could be issued to the bride and groom as coverage of their day and nothing more.
Whilst I don't plan on taking any action regarding the copyright question, it was just something that I had at the back of my mind and wondered if someone could shed any light on it (which they have). Well aware of my position when I take photos myself and copyright etc but wasn't sure about this when acting as a second shooter.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.



32 Users currently online   Blue=Models Orange=Photographers Red=Agencies Purple=MUA/Stylists Grey=Studios Green=Moderators
blurob DareMeDD ElleLaura MissCaraJane pinklilly
Andrewmoon andychittock Antz Cheshunt83 chicimages Chris_Mansfield djb1 gazzer59 hylander ignite JRFox lysander Matt1988 mauricesimagery modelboutique nickdandalos Photokirk1 redbaron rsg7500 southernsnapper stevegosh steveh32 Steveharratt TinDolls tms vanbrighouse
matt