Right side of the Law

[jujitsu1]

Hi there I'm form the U.K and would like to know if I can sell an image of a photo I've taken of buildings ? I've recently started do HDR's and I've found buildings work very well with this effect. So I started doing pubs and old ruinings and some old houses and mills. What I'd like to know is whether I can legally sell them once I've HDR'ed them. Would I need the premises consent ? Would help if I could get replies from U.K Photographer

[OsmosisStudios]

Generally speaking you'll want a property release signed by the building's owner. This is a simple form that ensures that YOU dont have to pay THEM some kind of royalties down the line.

If you get one before shooting, generally speaking these also include an accident indemnification clause that absolves the property owner of any injuries that could occur.

[jujitsu1]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Generally speaking you'll want a property release signed by the building's owner. This is a simple form that ensures that YOU dont have to pay THEM some kind of royalties down the line.

If you get one before shooting, generally speaking these also include an accident indemnification clause that absolves the property owner of any injuries that could occur.

I've already taken the shot from a public footpath. Its of an old Mill.

[jujitsu1]

I'm bumping this up to see if I can get some comments on it. I cant believe I've 75 view but only one other reply. Please help.

[theArchitect]

I don't think you'll get a definitive answer without getting proper legal advice, even then it's difficult as it's not something that regularly gets to court to get tested.

But from what I've read mainly on the net - if you're shooting in a public place then you're OK.
If you're shooting on private land then the land owner can specifiy if photography is allowed or not (comes under Tresspass if you ignore it).

There are also some sensitive buildings you can't shoot - such as military training grounds etc.

That said, stock websites often like having a property release so if you're planning on submitting to them it might be worth it.

[theArchitect]

This might be of some use too: UK Photographers Rights v2 — Sirimo Photo

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by jujitsu1

I've already taken the shot from a public footpath. Its of an old Mill.

Even so, it's often best to get a property release.

[jujitsu1]

Thank for your replies. This is some thing I'm going to have to have a look into as I've a few buildings that are no longer in use.

[doctorjames]

Under current UK law photographs of inanimate objects (i.e. buildings, vehicles e.t.c.) when taken from a public place do not need a release . The same is not true of people however, due to recent changes.

If you were not on public land, or land that you had permission to be on then you would not be able to proceed without a release.

An example of this is googles streetview. They needed no permission from the land or house owner to shoot, distribute or profit from this service.

This only applies in the UK though, and there are some exceptions such as goverment or military buildings.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by jujitsu1

Thank for your replies. This is some thing I'm going to have to have a look into as I've a few buildings that are no longer in use.

The thing is, even if youre on a public road or footpath, you may need a release to SELL the image. It's fine to take pictures in a public space, but publishing still usually requires a release of some sort.