RetouchPRO

Go Back   RetouchPRO > Business > Legal Issues
Register Blogs FAQ Site Nav Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Legal Issues Copyright, releases, likeness rights, licenses, etc.
NOT a replacement for professional council

copyright laws

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 06-13-2003, 02:10 PM
chiquitita's Avatar
chiquitita chiquitita is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 247
Mike describes what my thoughts are on the "how to".

The point is this - 10 years later and 5 states away, why should I have to try and locate the original photographer - who may or may not be around and who may or may not still have the negs - to get a copy of a photo of ME? The picture is of me - nobody is going to sell it as artwork - or at least they shouldn't be doing that - it is not a modeling job I did - there should be no reason that I should have to continue to pay for something I already paid for. I understand that there are costs involved in having a studio, but I also know there are other ways of making that money than keeping a hold on your clients like that. You can argue with me if you'd like, but it just isn't the way I do business. I find it less than honest. Especially since many people really don't understand this going in - they assume that when they buy something - it's theirs.
Reply With Quote top
  #22  
Old 06-14-2003, 04:32 PM
cinderella cinderella is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 154
JimI tried to go to the thread you mentioned

is another thread you might like to look into on this topic. In it I covered a lawsuit that I was involved in (13 portraits used by a shopping center for their own promotion) and also the fact that copying old family photos is not likely to get you in trouble simply because of the costs involved in taking up any legal action.

http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/sh...=&threadid=2052

but it no longer exists.


Chiquita, I agree with you.


Jak, Thanks for illluminating me about WM policies. I did get the 1932 wedding photo printed after I signed a release (provided by WM). But they would not sell me the prints of the photo with the background which I would guess was taken in the 80's. It has no identifying marks on it. You can see it at this thread > (Don't know how to point you at it) In fact you gave me some help with it. A totally red photo. "Removing Red Cast" in "Help Requested " forum . I am not getting paid to do this for a friend.

I have learned so much about retouching and restoring photos from RP and was going to tackle my wedding photos (33 years old) and a family photo taken about 1980 (as soon as I get better at colorizing) but now I don't know if I'll bother as I won't know where to get them printed.

Jak, Where do you print the photos you restore and retouch.?

Many of you sound like professionals. Is there a place on this forum where there is a list of people who do retouching . And their fee schedule????

Jak, Does this mean WM really only wants to print recent photos out of digi cams with their Fuji equipment????

Still think WM needs to post some very large signs explaining this. So a person like me won't feel like I've been accused of stealing or shoplifting or some such thing.
Reply With Quote top
  #23  
Old 06-14-2003, 05:18 PM
Jakaleena's Avatar
Jakaleena Jakaleena is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 709
Quote:
Jak, Does this mean WM really only wants to print recent photos out of digi cams with their Fuji equipment????
No, most of the prints we copy are family snapshots (the Fuji DPC and the Kodak Picture Maker both have scanners), while the next largest number of prints are from digital sources. There are a huge number of people (genealogists, scrap bookers) who make copies of other things besides studio prints.

I have my stuff printed at work, but if it is a professional photograph I either track down a release or ask the client to provide a release. The PPA is a good resource for information on obtaining releases. If you have an idea of aproximately what year the photograph was taken and aproximately what area it was taken in, they can do quite a lot to help track down the photographer or their heirs. Failing that, they may have some good advice for you on getting your restoration work printed. I always refer the people who's photos we decline to print because of copyright issues to the PPA. The phone number is 1-800-786-6277.

Also,
HERE is a really good .pdf document on copyright with some forms you might find useful.
Reply With Quote top
  #24  
Old 06-14-2003, 05:55 PM
cinderella cinderella is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 154
"Also,
HERE is a really good .pdf document on copyright with some forms you might find useful

Jak, Thanks for that helpful link.

With a page from that in hand I hope I can get my photos printed.
I will call the 800 # to see if PPA can track down my wedding photographer who does not appear in yellow pages.

I am now among the enlightened.

GO SPURS
Reply With Quote top
  #25  
Old 06-14-2003, 06:27 PM
Ed_L's Avatar
Ed_L Ed_L is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: northwest Indiana, about 45 minutes from Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,824
I haven't been around for a couple of days, so I didn't have the chance to reply before. It is my opinion (and also the law) that professionally made portraits deserve to be protected by copyright law just as much as the work of an artist who paints beautiful landscapes. Most people who take professional photography courses in portraiture don't make it in a business of their own. There is more than one reason for this. The work is not over as soon as the shutter is snapped....that's for sure. A successful portrait business requires long working hours, equipment, and the ability to produce a portrait that evokes a certain feeling from the viewer. I think Jak was right on the money when she suggested that a poorly made reprint or copy could have a negative effect on the photographer. This negative effect is something that not many portrait photographers would want to contend with. That's money out of their pockets, not because of lost profit from the reprints, but because of business lost through poorly made copies. If it were so easy to make beautiful portraits, nobody would need a professional portriat photographer to begin with. These people learned their craft well, and they have mouths to feed just like the rest of us.

Even though I feel the way I do about the subject, I do understand why some people feel differently than I do. That's the reason we need laws.

Chiquitita does bring up some good points. If I had to make a restoration of an old portrait for someone, and I tried to find the holder of the copyright, and failed, I would get something in writing from the customer that would take me off the hook. Then I would do the restoration, and be able to sleep at night, thinking I did the ethical thing. I tried to get the proper release.

Ed
Reply With Quote top
  #26  
Old 06-15-2003, 04:16 PM
chiquitita's Avatar
chiquitita chiquitita is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 247
I will just say one last thing, in case I wasn't clear on this.

I don't mind that someone would want to hold onto a copyright for things that could be reproduced for commercial purposes - however, I think that if John Doe gets a print done of his family and 7 years later when the kids are grown and they want copies of that pic for their own homes, they should be able to go and get copies of the pic made without a hassle from anyone.

Now, if the picture was a really adorable photo of a baby done Anne Geddes style and John Doe wanted to sell it to a greeting card company - then I agree that would be a problem because he is trying to make a profit off of someone else's work.
Reply With Quote top
  #27  
Old 06-16-2003, 10:40 AM
KevinBE's Avatar
KevinBE KevinBE is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Lake Charles, LA
Posts: 511
I know I am a little late on this one but I wanted to chime in. My policy is that if the picture is an old professional portrait and every attempt to discover who the photographer is fails then I get a signed release from the picture owner and proceed with the restore. I am assuming that this resolves me from any liability.

Now I have been asked to re-print fairly new portraits that have no copyright imprint I have to refuse the work. For some reason Sears and a couple of local studios do not put their copyright signature on their work. I can't imagine why they don't sign their work, it makes my job harder. Customers don't understand the copyright laws. I make it a point to put my signature on any of my original work that goes on display. I think that that should be part of the law, photographers should always sign their work.
Reply With Quote top
  #28  
Old 06-16-2003, 02:07 PM
LactoBeeZor's Avatar
LactoBeeZor LactoBeeZor is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 93
This thread is interesting in the fact that I do agree with both sides. But the major question I had was; "How do you guys/gals do restoration projects?" If someone wanted a photo of theirs restored how do you go about it if it was studio aquired so many years ago.
Please PM me and I will send my email because I do want to see a sample of a release statement and or a policy how this should be done legally.

Thanks;
Reply With Quote top
  #29  
Old 06-16-2003, 02:37 PM
cinderella cinderella is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 154
The following, excerpted from Jakaleena's reply earlier in this thread answered your question, at least I believe it did if I understand all this copyright stuff correctly.

" if it is a professional photograph I either track down a release or ask the client to provide a release. The PPA is a good resource for information on obtaining releases. If you have an idea of aproximately what year the photograph was taken and aproximately what area it was taken in, they can do quite a lot to help track down the photographer or their heirs. Failing that, they may have some good advice for you on getting your restoration work printed. I always refer the people who's photos we decline to print because of copyright issues to the PPA. The phone number is 1-800-786-6277.

Also,
HERE is a really good .pdf document on copyright with some forms you might find useful"
Above Posted by JAK on this thread 6/14/03

If anyone knows of a better release form please share the source.
"
Reply With Quote top
  #30  
Old 06-17-2003, 01:41 PM
cinderella cinderella is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 154
Jak,
If the owner of the red photo I restored,retouched fills out page 6 of the PMA document , checking the boxes to indicate she does not know the photographer of this church directory photo taken about 1977, will WM accept this release??? Or should I look for somewhere else that will accept it. If you do not wish to discuss this on the air please PM me.

Also , what is "fair use" (the third box)
Reply With Quote top
Reply

  RetouchPRO > Business > Legal Issues


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Copyright Duv Legal Issues 17 09-27-2007 08:33 PM
Copyright again bcarll Legal Issues 3 12-10-2006 11:03 PM
Another interesting Copyright question TheTexan Legal Issues 4 09-03-2002 08:14 PM
Copyright free images d_kendal Legal Issues 8 05-22-2002 06:38 PM
Non-work related copyright Ed_L Legal Issues 2 04-29-2002 06:02 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2016 Doug Nelson. All Rights Reserved