Napioa - Wind Origins

Napioa - Wind Origins
by octopus                

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Hot answers tagged

76

From experience I'd advise that you should not explain anything (politely or otherwise) when it comes to people wanting you to work for free. Explaining things just gets you into a situation where people (usually people who want everything for free) take it as an invitation to challenge your position regarding payment and licencing which will waste your ...


57

You have, as a professional, received a request from a potential customer. The response from you should be a written quotation stating your price and other commercial terms.


42

In general, the rule is simple: if you don't know you have the right to use an image, don't use it. It doesn't matter if it's all over the web, it could still be you that the copyright holder decides to sue - whereas with trademarks, it can be the case that if you don't defend the trademark, it can be deemed to have become "generic", nothing like that ...


19

As somebody who is interested in photography as a hobby -- not a profession, and therefore not worried about making income from it -- I first consider who is asking. I've had a few requests from groups I am happy to support: mostly local parks and local wildlife preserves. I know they have a small budget but as I frequent them (often for free) and get lots ...


18

For commercial use, you have to pay. Period. Maybe not much. If it's for commercial use, the "too poor to pay" line is fiction.


17

I'd suggest contacting the photographer to see what their "specified manner" might be, as a matter of courtesy. But the actual legal requirements are (by design) quite reasonable for reuse. If you read the actual license terms in their full, legal-language form, the key relevant point appears to be: Such credit may be implemented in any reasonable manner; ...


14

You absolutely should be paid. And not only that, you absolutely have the right to protect your work. There are dangers associated with offering "free use" of your work, as once you do, you can never really tell how far your work may be distributed "for free". The company you license it to may turn around and license another company to create some design ...


13

The big question is do you license strictly for stock, or do you also license for assignment? FotoQuote (which is what I use) is 'the industry standard' (self proclaimed though that may be), and truth-be-told that 'fact' does on occasion enter into my negotiation process if I get a balky client: "Well, I don't know Mr. Hip Brand Manager, as you know we use ...


12

I have a different take on this since I don't derive a living from photography. I do it for fun, personal enjoyment, having the pictures, the challenge, having other people like pictures I show them, etc. What I insist on is being properly credited. I get satisfaction out of knowing other people liked a picture from me enough to publish it, and the ...


11

You seem to be mixing up two different concepts, copyright and licensing. As a photographer, you own the copyright for images you create (unless you have other contracts which override this, such as a work for hire agreement). The only other action to take regarding your copyright is optionally registering as such (which is usually optional). Your main ...


10

My personal opinion on this is that, while I understand the photographer's position, your wedding album is not her portfolio, even if you want something hideous it's your right as the one paying for the job - I wouldn't agree to her terms. I believe, that for a full price job the service provider can't put his/her own interest above the client's. You can ...


10

The question here is "what exactly did you sell"? There are two major possibilities here: You sold the copyright to the photo. In that case, you gave up all rights to it and you can't now use the photo on Facebook or anywhere else, or sell the photo to other artists. In particular, the buyer could now modify the photograph to his choosing and you'd have no ...


9

For a photobook, I'd consider the best solution would be to add a credits section on the last page, or on the book flap. Morally, that respects the spirit of the licence, and since it's a private use, I wouldn't be too concerned about the legal side of things. Something along the lines of "Thanks to So and So, who provided the original photograph on which ...


9

Creative works are automatically protected by copyright law. You don't have to register the work, put a copyright symbol on it or anything. By default, nobody can copy it (except for fair use). That means that if you see some creative work on the web and it is not accompanied by a copyright license or public domain waiver you pretty much by definition do not ...


8

Simply telling them isn't rude. Most people would only be asking because they didn't realize it was a for-pay product in the first place. So just let them know. Them: "Can you send me a link to the digital version of that photo?" You: "Actually, selling those photographs is how I make my living. So I can't just give the source file to you, but if you want ...


7

If it is for an app in the App Store, then Apple has some pretty strict guidelines on what you can and cannot do with product images here: https://developer.apple.com/appstore/AppStoreMarketingGuidelines.pdf (iOS Developer account may be required to view)


7

If you store your images on an online repository, then just say “Sure!” and then just provide them with a link to the repository where you store them. But ensure that it is one where they will have to pay to download or pay to view anything larger than a large size thumbnail! It will be very bold of someone to come back to you and ask for it to be given to ...


6

This is actually a more complicated question than you think, but the short answer is "you can do both, mostly". I post images online using a Creative Commons license -- but I limit those images to lower resolution (1000 pixel widest). That means people are able to use it but the version of the image that's free is one that (to me) has relatively low ...


6

You can't just use them without permission. See the ⓘ symbol in the lower right corner of the image on Bing, right next to the arrows for previous and next image? That shows you the copyright information for that particular image. You could follow that information and get a license — most of the images are from stock photo agencies and I doubt Bing has an ...


6

I think the point is to have the copyright and CC-licence note in such place so that a viewer a) wouldn't mistake the image as yours, and b) would find the author if they look for it. So just ask yourself: a) Are there places that might make someone think you've authored the images? b) Where would someone go look to see who created the work? Put the ...


5

You do need to give attribution any time you create a copy of it (even if you have modified it yourself). What if you write an attribution on the back (and give attribution verbally)? That way, if your friend forgets where you said you found it, he/she can look on the back of the photo to find out. As others have suggested, your best bet is to contact the ...


5

My understanding is that an image cannot stand independently if greater than 1000 pixels. This would be using the image itself as the primary design, where if the image is incorporated into a larger design and the image is not the primary object, then you are in the clear. This stipulation is often to prevent the image being sold as artwork by a person other ...


5

You'll find that laws do exist restricting photography but they are more around common sense scenarios. For example, setting up a tripod in public is alright. Setting up a tripod in public in a way that inconveniences or blocks others counts as a public obstructions, for which there are laws. That's common sense. Similarly, you are good to take photos ...


5

Summary: The short answer is that a photographer seems to have very wide rights in Australia - more so than in many other countries. When in a public place you can take photos of people also in public, and of people who you can see from the public place, with some limitations re looking into buildings etc. There are some limitations on photos of armed ...


5

You have automatic copyright on your own pictures. Regardless of who you hand them to. What you want is to establish a "usage agreement", a.k.a. a usage license, where you will grant the band the rights to use your pictures for their own promotion, and only that, in exchange for being credited for your work. Based on this, the records company will not ...


5

It depends, if this goes bad then out of the two probably the person with a better lawyer owns the copyright :-) The actual answer depends on who is responsible for the shoot, who is paying who and any contracts and agreements between those people. Questions like that are the reason: You should never work in any creative capacity without a contract ...


5

Now this was fun to research. Good question! Practical tips For all sense and purposes legal battles are trouble, expensive and take time. So avoid them -- in this case a simple contract with details on who owns the copyright would help. Often a contract can be verbal. Legal Here are my thoughts on what the legal situation could be. I am not that well ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible