A photo sold for commercial use, then later sold for exclusive use?

[denreisan]

I was wondering if a photo is sold for commercial use to one person or business, and then later a different person or business asks for exclusive rights to the same exact photo, would their be any legal problems with the previous buyer?

[Jim Bryant]

Depends upon what rights you sold the first client. That's why contracts are good. Sometimes clients don't understand the difference between licensing a photo for a period of time, exclusive rights, limited rights and such. It's up to you as a photographer to educate them. So get busy and go to the ASMP.org site and bone up on the subject.

[Xposurepro]

and if you've ever licensed an image with a standard RF usage it can never ever .. ever ever .. until the end of time ... be licensed as a RM with exclusive rights for any amount of time. People screw up on that one more than anything and sometimes it even makes the news which leads to big trouble.

[denreisan]

Originally Posted by Jim Bryant

Depends upon what rights you sold the first client. That's why contracts are good. Sometimes clients don't understand the difference between licensing a photo for a period of time, exclusive rights, limited rights and such. It's up to you as a photographer to educate them. So get busy and go to the ASMP.org site and bone up on the subject.

Thanks very much for the advice. I never heard of asmp.org as well so thank you for that!

Originally Posted by Xposurepro

and if you've ever licensed an image with a standard RF usage it can never ever .. ever ever .. until the end of time ... be licensed as a RM with exclusive rights for any amount of time. People screw up on that one more than anything and sometimes it even makes the news which leads to big trouble.

Thanks. I'm an amateur photographer and would like to know what RF and RM stands for?

[theArchitect]

RF = royalty free
RM = rights managed