Can a photos subject claim copyright?

Jamesbuk

Jamesbuk

Suspended / Banned
Messages
802
Name
James Betts
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey guys and girls,

Just been having a discussion with someone about some photos and he says that I cant put copyright on them because I didnt ask permission from the people I took the photos of (Mountain bikers). I maintain that I can because I'm claiming ownership on the photo and not whats in the photo.. so Im not saying I own the copyright to say the make of the bike. Make sense?

So do I own full copyright of photos that I take? Or can the people in the photo claim they own copyright?

I did look on IPO website but it didnt mention subjects.

Regards, James
 
my understanding, all be it a very loose understanding, is that unless you are working for someone at the time and subject to their contract, you own the copyright of all photos you take. what you are able to do with the photos will depend upon model release forms or what you are photographing etc. etc. but you own the actual copyright.....

the people who are in the photo have no copyright as it's an image that you have made.
 
:agree: you own the copyright.
You might not be able to sell them if you dont have a model release signed, assuming they were contracted to work for/with you, but it doesnt change the fact that you own the copyright.

Candids etc are a bit of a grey area since you didnt ask/work with the person to take the shot so you dont have their permission (model release) to sell the image. Or they might claim royalties/expenses on use of themselves for your benefit.
 
Yeah thats pretty much what I thought, and they weren't contracted or anything it was simply a load of bikers doing mountain biking and I was photoing for my own pleasure and a few asked me to put them on my website so they can have them and I agreed.

Like I said above, Im fairly sure it was the case that the photos are my intellectual property.

Regards, James
 
Unless you are working under a contract that states you are giving away your rights to your client, the images are your intellectual property, as you so rightly state.

Now I'd usually start droning on and on about model releases, and how you can't use the images commercially without one, and blah blah, but it's a fairly heavy subject, it's late, and I'm tired... It will take you 30 seconds, there's plenty of information and discussion about this subject - just use the search button ;)
 
If it was a public place, as in an area that is open to public access, rather than private land opened for the day....then you do NOT require a model release, even for commercial use of the photographs.

The people within those photographs have no say over what you use them for provided it is not defamatory or illegal - so if you shoot Joe Blogs jumping off a mountain and sell it to the bike maker, or th eclothes designer, or the helmet maker.... the rider cannot claim a share. End of story.

If there was an agreement or contract BEFORE you took the photographs then you will be bound by whatever that agreement stated.
 
Where you were shooting etc is irrelevant with regards to copyright.

The fact of the matter is, you own the copyright to the photos, unles you specifically give up your right by way of contract or written agreement.

What you can do with them, does depend on model releases etc etc, but the fact still remains, you own the copyright to the photos....end of.
 
They could only claim copyright if you had captured (in this case) a performance, display or routine, and they wouldn't be likely to claim that for a still, and I doubt they are paid trick cyclists in any case.

Model releases would be required for e.g. advertising use, but not for editorial e.g. accompanying a magazine article.
 
photon said:
They could only claim copyright if you had captured (in this case) a performance, display or routine,.
Click to expand...

Where on earth do you get that from? Can you give a source for this information please ?
 
If you record say a video of a theatrical performance then the actors, playwright etc have rights. These cyclists could be a circus troupe with an act . . . but in any case it's generally understood that a still of a performance does not infringe on the rights of the performers. I guess the Red Arrows could get shirty about sales of photos of their displays.

Search for "performance rights" for more info.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top