Following long chats over a coffee with clients and account handlers, both experienced and new to commissioning photographers...

I've been asked "So what is this copyright?" often followed by "We didn't really do it on my course!" and "Well I've always been too shy to ask anyone about it".

I thought it might be a help to try and put something on my site and cover some of the most asked questions, it's not meant as a definitive legal guide but it covers copyright in commissioning photography and if I've missed anything out, I'm always available for a cuppa and a chat.

So here goes, it's not short but hopefully it's helpful...

Introduction

Knowing how and when images can be used is essential for both professional photographers and companies / agencies commissioning them. It seems to be believed by some clients, that by commissioning a photographer all rights to images or even copyright become theirs, but this is not true and hasn't been for many years.

In fact The Copyright, Designs & Patents Act 1988 states that the copyright of the photograph belongs to the the person who took it.

"Copyright is the right of the creator to reproduce their own work and to authorise others to reproduce or copy that work. This right is granted exclusively to the creator of the work and gives them control of their work"



Copyright and Licencing in practice

Put simply under UK Copyright Law the photographer owns the copyright of all images and licences specific usage rights to clients by (written) agreement.

In Practice this means the wider the intended use of the images the higher the photographers fee. Fees are based on a combination of the use(s) of the photography and the time required to shoot the job. At the quoting stage it is best to discuss a fee based on initial needs (for example PR use only), in the knowledge that if needed additional rights (eg. annual report or advertising) and relevant fees can be negotiated at a later date. This keeps the costs down for you the client, saving unneccesary expense paying for more rights that you may never need.

Photographers have the right to control copying, reproduction, distribution, display and manipulation of their images. Usage rights not specifically granted to the client remain the photographers. However rights of exclusivity are given to the client (subject to clause 9 of my terms & conditions) which means the photographer is unable to publish or supply the material to any third party for publication during the term of the licence, without the express permission of the client.

Similarly if a third party, contractor or supplier of the client wishes to use an image for their own purposes the photographer must be contacted directly to negotiate a fee to use the pictures (with the permission of the client), again only the photographer has the right to licence the use of his work.

Where more than one party is involved in paying for the commission (known as multi-party usage) this must be clearly stated at the time of quoting / commissioning. The fee will be higher in this case because of the wider benefit to additional companies. Although each company will be reducing costs compared to commissioning the photography individually.

Physical possession of prints, digital files or CD's does not necessarily grant the right to reproduce the images. Without specific permission or licence from the photographer it is a violation of UK copyright law to reproduce the images in any form, this includes colour copying. It is therefore important to understand the scope of the usage you require and are licenced for.



Why is copyright and licencing important to photographers?

Copyright has always been important to photographers (the current act came into effect in August 1989). But with the development of colour copiers, flatbed scanners and more recently the internet and web based media it has led to widespread copyright violation and unlicenced use of photographers work. Added to this archiving, unauthorised syndication and rights grabs by third parties, publishers and some clients images are now published far more widely than originally specified.



Examples of copyright violation / unlicenced use
(which have happened)

a) PR launch involving a celebrity is widely distributed by client (perfectly within terms of PR licence) to all media and is widely used, generating successful campaign increasing the clients profile.

BUT ... Publishers digitally archive both their own pictures and ones sent to them. Subsequently the celebrity picture is re-used, cropped down to a head & shoulders for an unrelated story.

This is unlicenced use by the publisher, and also of no benefit to the clients profile.

It is important that any copyright notices attached to prints or digital file are not removed or covered to avoid this sort of violation by publishers or third parties. Importantly scanning of supplied prints (for use within the licence ie. emailing to publications for PR use) means that images have no clearly attributed copyright details ie. The Photographers. The photographer has to give specific permission for scanning of prints and insists the copyright of the photographer must be clearly attributable in the file info and on image files.

ALL MATERIAL SUPPLIED BY THE PHOTOGRAPHER TO CLIENTS EITHER DIGITAL OR IN PRINT FORM IS MARKED "COPYRIGHT © ROB LACEY PHOTOGRAPHER"



b) Agency books photographer for a PR case study to show clients successful involvement with another (third party) business. The picture is used by the targeted media, successfully promoting both the clients business and by association the case studies business.

THEN ... The agency or client is subsequently asked by the third party in the photograph for a couple of "free" prints, just to use in their publicity material. As a result they use it for nothing in their brochure and also send it to another supplier who uses it in their annual report.

This would be unlicenced use by a third party, infact by at least 2 third parties and NOT Public Relations (as licenced). Any complimentary prints supplied by agency or client to third party, NOT FOR PR USE must be supplied on a personal use only basis ie. NOT FOR REPRODUCTION. Third party use (with the permission of the client) can be made with payment of an additional fee negotiated with the photographer based on required usage.



c) Client uses picture on own website to illustrate news of recent launch.

BUT ... The image has no byline ... (Copyright) © Rob Lacey (Photographer)

The image is easily downloaded by third parties and unauthorised use is difficult to trace. The internet is not a copyright free zone, downloading and use on the internet is reproduction and is covered by UK copyright law. All images published electronically must be bylined and credited to the photographer.



d) Client requests PR agency commission photography for publication in local press.

THEN ... The clients likes a specific image and feels it would suit a forthcoming ad campaign, for which their ad agency they would have had to commission additional photography.

This additional use was not covered by the original licence so a reasonable fee was negotiated covering this higher value use, but saving the client additional expense of commissioning new photography.



e) All the pictures commissioned by client are archived for further unspecified and unknown use. Overtime the client then uses an image for every eventually in adverts, annual reports and posters etc, but had originally briefed photographer use was only for press release.

SO ... This would be a violation of the original PR licence. However licencing every job for All Uses could be unneccessarily costly, as many jobs would have no additional uses beyond the original press release. (The Association of Photographers guide for All Uses Licence is 750% of original fee). My rates are very reasonable in comparision. This is why it is best to cover the initial needs ie. PR use, and agree additional use only on a specific image if required at a later date.



f) A newspaper has learned of an unfortunate event which a client is involved in, they have a picture of them on file from a recent press release. The print / digital file is copyright marked to the photographer.

SO ... The paper contacted the photographer for permission to use the picture (given that they received it for use in a positive story). Concerned for the best interests of the client, the photographer denied the paper permission until the agency was aware of the situation and was able to impliment crisis management on behalf of the client.

Without the copyright notice intact the paper would have published the story with little control by either the photographer, client or agency. (although still technically inbreach of the photographers copyright they would not have known who the photographer was to contact)



Sample Usage Licence

This is a sample of one of my Usage Licences, issued with the delivery of the photographs. I have standard licences to cover ...

PR & Internal use ... Covers PR use,internal, newsletter & client website

Corporate & PR use ... Covers Annual report & brochure as well as the above

Multi Party use ... Covers multiple company use for specified uses

All uses ... This covers All uses by the named client only (not 3rd party use)

These cover various levels of licencing and corresponding varying fees, I can also tailor licences specifically to clients needs.



Thanks for getting this far, hopefully this has been a help explaining UK copyright law as straightfowardly as possible.

"Beyond the Lens" Rights, ethics & business practice in Professional Photography. Available from the Association of Photographers tel 020 7739 6669 email aop@dircon.co.uk

Many thanks to everyone who has given input, permissions and references for it to finally make it on to the site.

Cheers, Rob