01-11-2013, 02:12 PM #1
Urgent advice needed RE licence usage & who owns the photos!
I have a fashion shoot tomorrow morning and i've never done anything like this before... I told the client they would have 'unlimited licence usage'... but what does that actually mean?!
I know I retain copyright, and they can do what ever they want with the pics... but can I use them in my promotions, social media, website etc? Or can I only do it once they've used them?
If the model asks for copies can I say yes, no or yes but for x amount... or do the pics belong to the client?
Probably should have looked in to this more than a day before admittedly
01-11-2013, 02:31 PM #2
What is in writing?
You can give the client unlimited usage rights while still retaining all of your usage rights as long as you did not assign the client "exclusive" rights.
The model's usage rights will be portfolio use of whatever is provided to her, at a minimum (unless she/he waves them), and as further dictated by the TOU she agrees to (signs).
If the model is from an agency, or provided by the client, then that is probably decided between them. Most agencies will provide a release and TOU's in their own contract (voucher)...and they will charge according to the rights released by the model/agency and the "profile" of the client/job.
Yeah, you really should have looked into this before...if no-one really knows what they agreeing to at this point, tomorrow might be a bit late. I suppose if you are in charge of it all you can put together your own agreements as you think should fit everyone and just try to slip it by...
Edit: BTW, you *cannot* give the client "unlimited usage rights" unless the model/agency has first given them to you and there is some wording in the release that makes it "transferable" to the client...
Last edited by sk66; 01-11-2013 at 02:36 PM.
01-11-2013, 04:25 PM #3
What would you suggest I put regarding the licence in the contract?
I haven't told them they can have exclusive rights... just an unlimited usage licence. Should I add something like...
"The photographer grants the client an unlimited usage licence whilst retaining copyright and a full usage rights for their own purposes"
I don't know if the model is signed to an agency or not tbh... the client has just informed me they have got a model for the shoot... am I on sticky ground with this?
01-11-2013, 04:49 PM #4
Just found a template on the web and copied this whilst making a few changes:
GRANT OF LICENSE: This license grants the Client ("Licensee") a single use, non-transferable, non-exclusive, non-expiring license to use the above-mentioned images for an unlimited time period. You may not sell, rent, lease, or sublicense the photos to any other companies or entities not mentioned in this license agreement. The photographer retains the full copyright and a full usage rights for their own purposes at all times.
PERMITTED/PROHIBITED USES: The images may be used for any personal, commercial, non-profit, or editorial projects such as video, film, broadcast, multimedia, live performance, electronic, or print media, including advertising. The images may be backed up or archived as necessary to complete the above stated uses only.
INDEMNIFICATION: You agree to indemnify and Andrew Hudson and Andy Hudson Photography harmless against any and all claims or liabilities asserted against Andrew Hudson and Andy Hudson Photography, arising out of access to these photos or in any connection with the breach of any of the terms of this agreement.
Does that sound about right?
01-11-2013, 06:09 PM #5
it means that they can do whatever they want with the images. So, it they happened to sell them to the magazine, they get the money you don't. Good thing you both are going to sit down to hash the agreement over. Have them sign a contract so that you don't screw yourself. Give them limited rights to have them reprinted, but not to do anything they want with them.
01-11-2013, 06:12 PM #6
Sounds about right..might have to remove the "single use" part...Based upon the timeframe and permitted uses it seems pointless anyways. But I'd leave it as it might leave room to re-negotiate should they use it in an article and then want to use it in advertising (a second use?).
The statement about the photographer retaining copyright is not necessary because they were not given up elsewhere.
The model release is actually the company's problem. But it might seem more "professional" if you were aware of this and had something available to "save the day" should they be unaware/ill-prepared.
Last edited by sk66; 01-11-2013 at 06:17 PM.
01-11-2013, 06:14 PM #7
01-11-2013, 06:16 PM #8
Yea, you need to inform folks that this is not a work for hire situation where since they are paying for service, they are not to be taken as owning the actually work. People are so misunderstood these days in rights management. It's up for the photographers to educate their clients.
01-11-2013, 06:42 PM #9
01-11-2013, 06:45 PM #10
Not the best of starts to me shooting fashion but a lesson learnt if nothing else!