Legal Question

[grimm]

I am a photographer for my work. They have me go to sites to take pictures of our projects for our portfolio. I then allow them full usage of the photos.

We got permission to photograph a particular project. Now the new manager of that site is demanding we remove the photographs of that site from our companies web site and my own. I don't feel this is fair or legal. But I don't know the exact laws.

The photos are interior architectural shots.

where do I stand legally? Can i fight this?

[djb5118]

if you have permission to shoot the site then i dont see it as a problem, as long as you have in the contract that you can use the photos for your portfolio and company uses.

but im no lawyer

[grimm]

well after a little digging and a few questions I'm told that this is only for a temporary time period until the site opens for business. I can respect that request, but i would still like to know where a photographer would stand in a situation like this.

[thewake]

Originally Posted by grimm

I am a photographer for my work. They have me go to sites to take pictures of our projects for our portfolio. I then allow them full usage of the photos.

We got permission to photograph a particular project. Now the new manager of that site is demanding we remove the photographs of that site from our companies web site and my own. I don't feel this is fair or legal. But I don't know the exact laws.

The photos are interior architectural shots.

where do I stand legally? Can i fight this?

Are you sure the photos you take are not a 'work for hire'? If they are then they are not yours and it is not up to you to fight it, but your employer. Have you read the contract with the site regarding the permission to photograph the site and the publication clauses it contains? Your answers would be in there somewhere.

[grimm]

the ownership of the photos is not in question,

This may sound ignorant but, i was never given a contract from the site. We wrote the site and asked for permission to photograph the site to document our part of the work for portfolio use. We were granted that permission. The person that granted that permission does not work for the company anymore, and the new person in charge wants us to remove them until the site opens for business, as i stated in the previous post.

In the future I'm wondering how to protect myself and the company i work for from a similar situation from happening.
with that you suggest before requesting to take photos of the site we get the site documentation, disclosing the use of photographs taken there in? this seems to be an odd request. I don't know? I'm not disagreeing, I just don't know how one of those contracts would exist for a building under construction.

What happens in the case of exterior photograph taken from a public area of a building with such a publication contract? you can't publish your picture? thats not true?

[TROLL]

any recognizeable people or property will need a model or property release, and unfortunately without it then you're vulnerable at any time to someone changing their mind.

[grimm]

This is from a legal document i read that was posted in Nov 2006 (i know it's a little dated):

Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary,
the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully
from public places:
accident and fire scenes
children
celebrities
bridges and other infrastructure
residential and commercial buildings
industrial facilities and public utilities
transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
Superfund sites
criminal activities
law enforcement officers

so? whats the real law? i know the above states from a public place. and my question is about a private property. But to what extent does our agreement need to cover? I'd like to know what sort of things we need to specifically add to our contract to cover and prevent these events from happening.

[TROLL]

ah, the difference is in the useage of the photos... you can absolutely photograph that for journalistic purposes, however the rules change when its for commercial use.

[grimm]

Please don't think i'm disagreeing, But from another article I read, as long as I am not trying to sell the pictures I have every right to publish them. And have them on display?

oh and just to be clear my company nor I are being sued. But moving forward I think we need more legal protection and understanding.

[TROLL]

the only way you'd be allowed to use them is for journalistic purposes... even though you're not being paid for the photos you took directly, they are basically advertising for your company and they are 'commercial use' which require a model or property release.
the way i see it, you should take the photos down and take it as a learning experience, and get releases from now on since its easy to do and will avoid any future problems.

[JET02WRX]

Originally Posted by grimm

law enforcement officers

Sorry to go a tiny bit off topic.... but if this is in fact true... why can the police tell you to turn off your camera/camcorder when they see you filming something they are doing...ie making an arrest... breaking up a fight..etc...

[grimm]

well the photos have been taken down. But I guess the miss-conception was, we not only need to ask permission to take the photos but also to publish them?
I will be talking to my companies owner about having our lawyer right up a legal release for us.

[grimm]

Originally Posted by JET02WRX

Sorry to go a tiny bit off topic.... but if this is in fact true... why can the police tell you to turn off your camera/camcorder when they see you filming something they are doing...ie making an arrest... breaking up a fight..etc...

If you read the article i linked to, they say that is il-legal for the officer to do. As well as trying to confiscate the film or photos. or detain you for taking the photos.

[TROLL]

the problem with that article is that it has a photographer rights activist spin on it, and if thats what you base all of your knowledge on you're not preparing yourself fully for the situation.
he does not go into personal, journalistic, and commerical use at all, and thats where your confusion is. in fact he oversimplifies things a lot and doesnt go in to a lot of it which is pretty dangerous and misleading to the reader.
bottom line is you are using the photos for commercial use, and you need a release to have the rights to use it. sorry if thats not the answer that you want to hear but its a lot better to know the hardball truth now than be ill informed and ill prepared to do battle if it comes down to it.

[grimm]

so just to be devils advocate, the sonic pictures, you got releases from every car owner, and sonic?

It's not that i like or don't like an answer, i'm just trying to be clear. I mean saying all you need is a release is a pretty simple answer too? what does the release need to make it solid and appropriate?

is this a good form?


Property Release

For valuable consideration herein acknowledged as received, the undersigned being the legal owner of, or having the right to permit the taking and use of photographs of certain property designated as:

_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________

does grant to photographer’s name goes here his/her agents or assigns, the full rights to use such photographs and copyright same, in advertising, trade, or for any purpose.

a) I also permit the use of any printed material in connection therewith.

b) I hereby relinquish any right that I may have to examine or approve the completed product or products or the advertising copy or printed material that may be used in conjunction therewith or the use to which it may be applied.

c) I hereby release, discharge and agree to save harmless [photographer] his/her heirs, legal representatives or assigns, and all persons functioning under his/her permission or authority, or those for whom he/she is functioning, from any liability by virtue of any blurring, distortion, alteration, optical illusion, or use in composite form whether intentional or otherwise, that may occur or be created in the taking of said picture or in any subsequent processing thereof, as well as any publication thereof, including without limitation any claims for libel or invasion of privacy.

d) I hereby affirm that I am over the age of majority and have the right to contract in my own name. I have read the above authorization, release and agreement, prior to its execution; I fully understand the contents thereof. This agreement shall be binding upon me and my heirs, legal representatives and assigns.

Dated: _______________________________________

Name:________________________________________

Address:______________________________________

City:_________________________________________

State/Zip:_____________________________________

Phone:_______________________________________

Witness:______________________________________


Permission To Use Pictures

In consideration for value received, receipt whereof is acknowledged, I hereby give photographer’s name goes here the absolute right and permission to publish, copyright and use pictures of me in which I may be included in whole or in part, composite or retouched in character or form, in conjunction with (initial those applicable):

_______my own name

_______a fictitious name

_______no name to be used

If the person photographed is under 18, I certify that I am his or her parent or legal guardian and I give my consent without reservation to the foregoing on his or her behalf.

Date:_____________________________________

Name:____________________________________

Address:__________________________________

Phone: ____________________________________

Signature:__________________________________

NOTE: dpcorner.com makes no warranties or representations in connections with these releases. Consult your attorney if you have any legal questions regarding them.

[TROLL]

if i ever wanted to use the sonic photos for commercial purposes then you're correct, i'd need a property release from sonic as well as property releases for every identifiable car in the photos i want to use, as well as model releases for every identifiable person in the photos i want to use. without that, they could come after me and they'd be in control.
we're just using them for journalistic purposes so the rules are a lot different, like what you mentioned above as them being in plain view in a public place so they are subject to being photographed (and the photos used for journalistic purpose).

[grimm]

Thanks Troll..