# Problem with a client about copyright release. help please



## Shadowwolf2008 (Oct 27, 2013)

So last month I did a photo-shoot. The client got 16 pictures printed out and a cd for $55. I do not include a copyright release forum with my prices. I have everybody sign a contract before the shoot that says exactly what they are getting and that they agree to it. They are demanding me to give them a FREE copyright release forum and stating that my package was false advertisement cause "everybody" else that has a cd in package gives you a copyright release. I feel it would not be fair to let them have one for free when others do not get this. That's like special treatment. To try and make the client happy I offer a copyright release forum for $10. Now they are threating to take me to court if I do not give them a copyright release forum for free or give them their money back. I did the job they wanted. Gave them what was signed in the contract. Delived the photographs in a timly manor. Why should I be required to give them their money back? Also just so everyone knows their is a total of 52 photographs on that cd. Advise Please. First time I ran into a problem.


----------



## wyogirl (Oct 27, 2013)

Refer to your contract.  If it gets to the point of legal action, seek a lawyer.  If your contract does not say that they get a release, then I would assume that they can't make too much trouble.  But again, seek professional legal advice.


----------



## wyogirl (Oct 27, 2013)

PS... they got a freakin steal at $55!  Just saying.


----------



## kathyt (Oct 27, 2013)

What in the heck do they want to do with them? I am confused. Are they talking about a print release? Do they have a logo on the files or something?


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 27, 2013)

Shadowwolf2008 said:


> So last month I did a photo-shoot. The client got 16 pictures printed out and a cd for $55. I do not include a copyright release forum with my prices. I have everybody sign a contract before the shoot that says exactly what they are getting and that they agree to it. They are demanding me to give them a FREE copyright release forum and stating that my package was false advertisement cause "everybody" else that has a cd in package gives you a copyright release. I feel it would not be fair to let them have one for free when others do not get this. That's like special treatment. To try and make the client happy I offer a copyright release forum for $10. Now they are threating to take me to court if I do not give them a copyright release forum for free or give them their money back. I did the job they wanted. Gave them what was signed in the contract. Delived the photographs in a timly manor. Why should I be required to give them their money back? Also just so everyone knows their is a total of 52 photographs on that cd. Advise Please. First time I ran into a problem.



Well from the sounds of things legally your in the right here - and if this does go to court because of the value placed on the pictures by the contract it will most likely end up in small claims court, which is good because a lawyer would not be necessary.  This sounds like a disagreement based on principle rather than money, but one thing you should consider is, how much is this worth to you?

You mentioned that you provide such a release for an additional $10.  Now, the question to ask yourself is this, is it really worth $10 to you to go through all this hassle and risk the possibility of winding up in court, even if it is just small claims?  I mean you will end up losing far more than $10 in time and other expenses regardless.  So my suggestion would be to apologize to the client for the misunderstanding, tell them that you had thought they had understood that such a release of copyright did have an additional fee involved, but under the circumstances since that wasn't made clear to them you'll be more than happy to give them one for no additional charge.  From a business perspective that would be the most expedient and cost effective way of dealing with this based on what you've told me.

However if this is a matter of principle to you and you really feel it is worth the time and hassle to make a stand of some sort, then certainly you should do so - just be aware that it will cost you time and will certainly lead to some pretty bad blood between you and the former client, which in the long run will most likely cost you some business as well.  But if you consider the principle involved worth defending then by all means, just be aware from a business perspective it's not going to be a cost effective decision.

My two cents worth at any rate.


----------



## Shadowwolf2008 (Oct 27, 2013)

Yes It is for all that. Mine are cheap since I am just starting up.


----------



## Shadowwolf2008 (Oct 27, 2013)

I also forgot to mention that they did not like one of the prints and wanted a different one Which I offered to do that for free. Now they want this release. If I don't stand up now, what will be next, the whole package redone? I've already decided that I am not going to do any type of business with this person on anything. Will the client really go to court over $10 or are they trying to scare me into giving them what they want is another thing.


----------



## Shadowwolf2008 (Oct 27, 2013)

They want the release so they can print the photographs at like Walmart or where ever. Yes I do have my business name on the bottom corner of the pictures to keep people from being able to make copies at chain stores. However they can still print them at home. My name is also on their for others that see the photograph and like it that they have an idea of who to look for if they would like photos done.


----------



## Overread (Oct 27, 2013)

Shadowwolf2008 said:


> Yes It is for all that. Mine are cheap since I am just starting up.



If you market toward a cheaper market then by the time you've built up experience enough to raise your prices to what you want to charge at a good rate you'll find yourself losing that whole market you've built - because you'll be shifting to charging for a product that they no longer can afford (or are willing to pay). As a result you have to go all  the way back to the beginning again and rebuild a totally new client base for yourself (whilst dealing with people complaining that you've put your prices up all the time). 

In addition the cheap sector for any service is always rife with people who will complain and threaten everything they can to get the most for the least investment. They'll always have a complaint or something extra that they want - tightfisted people and those with very limited disposable income are always going to learn those tricks. As a provider of those services you've got to take a firm line or they will walk all over you - you've got a contract so consider sticking to it. Then again life is about choosing the right fights and sometimes you have to give up and let something slip passed just to get rid of the client rather than making a stance and lumbering yourself with a long period of contention - stress and possible legal fees. (and thus yet even more stress). 



If you want you can set your prices high and then do "50% off for the first 20 customers" kinds of deal. You've set your price and its there for all to see, but you can use the discount period to get a little work early on. 


Note that in this specific case it sounds like the client is trying to bully you - threatening court action over $10 when the contract was clearly stated and signed by them before the photos were taken clearly shows that they've not a leg to stand on. They are just trying to pressure you into providing something you don't because other providers have done so - you're under no obligation to copy your competition. Yes you'll lose this client; but chances are you don't want them again anyway.



PS my  view is that if you give people a CD of photos which are of a suitable size for print (ie they are bigger than web display sizes) then that should come with a printing licence for them. Otherwise you're just kidding yourself because your tiny watermark will be cropped off or ignored and they'll print them at home or at the shops and be quite happy. 
Charge a rate for prints - then have a totally separate setup for CD with printing rights (make it a high cost IF you want to make your profit on the prints - make it a lower cost if you've made your profit from the sitting fee and the print/CD is just extra ontop).


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 27, 2013)

Shadowwolf2008 said:


> I also forgot to mention that they did not like one of the prints and wanted a different one Which I offered to do that for free. Now they want this release. If I don't stand up now, what will be next, the whole package redone? I've already decided that I am not going to do any type of business with this person on anything. Will the client really go to court over $10 or are they trying to scare me into giving them what they want is another thing.



Will they really go to court over this - well honestly who knows.  Not if they have half a brain, I mean it's 10 bucks for goodness sake.  But I've seen people do stuff that was a lot more ridiculous.  Are they worth keeping as a client - nope.  Like I said, only question you need to ask is do you really want to invest the time and hassle in this if worst case scenario they do decide to take it to court.  If the principle is worth that much to you, by all means stick to your guns.  Legally you are in the right.  From a strictly business perspective this one is a loser, even if you win in court it will cost you more than 10 bucks in lost time and hassle.  So you need to decide how important the principle is - that's really my only point.


----------



## KmH (Oct 27, 2013)

What the client wants is a use license, though in the retail photography business a use license is often called a print release.

If your contract does not include a use license/print release, then the complaining customer has little legal traction for claiming false advertising or for taking you to court to recover some portion of their money.
If the complaining customer were to pursue legal action, because only $55 is involved it would likely be in small claims court. People do not need to have an attorney in small claims court and can avoid that expense.

Just because other photographers include a use license/print release, does not mean all photographers have to include one.

If you do not have a legal registered/licensed business, the complaining client (or a competitor) can cause you a lot of financial difficulty by reporting you to your city and state governments.
In some states, the person doing the reporting gets a % of the fees, fines, and penalties the city and/or state collect from the owner of an illegal business as a reward.
Many cities and stares are strapped for money and get it from where ever they can.




> *Print Release - Use License*
> 
> All images © 2013 [name or studio here], All Rights Reserved.
> This Use License shall be governed by the laws of the State of _________.
> ...


----------



## Braineack (Oct 28, 2013)

they won't take you to court.  the court fees themselves will cost them more than they spent on your session.

But I agree with this:



> PS my view is that if you give people a CD of photos which are of a suitable size for print (ie they are bigger than web display sizes) then that should come with a printing licence for them. Otherwise you're just kidding yourself because your tiny watermark will be cropped off or ignored and they'll print them at home or at the shops and be quite happy.
> Charge a rate for prints - then have a totally separate setup for CD with printing rights (make it a high cost IF you want to make your profit on the prints - make it a lower cost if you've made your profit from the sitting fee and the print/CD is just extra ontop).



and this:



> If you do not have a legal registered/licensed business, the complaining client (or a competitor) can cause you a lot of financial difficulty by reporting you to your city and state governments.


----------



## manaheim (Oct 28, 2013)

I agree with what has been said, but in short...

1. Your prices are ridiculously too low. I  mean, $55 is crazy enough, but a copyright release (I assume you mean you're giving them the copyrights and giving them away) should be many times the cost of a single image, for one... so like hundreds of dollars in your case, but really many hundreds or even thousands of dollars for most people.
2. As you price for a release is only $10... seems like it would be less hassle to just give it to them. While I think it's a huge mistake to do it, for $10? Meh. 

You NEED to change your pricing structure and work with better clients. "Just starting up" I understand, but you're not going to want to do this long enough to even get into the higher tier market if you have clients threatening to sue you over $10.


----------



## kathyt (Oct 28, 2013)

If you are just starting up you need to make a positive name for yourself. Make the client happy. If they want a decent print, then give them a decent print.


----------



## Shadowwolf2008 (Oct 28, 2013)

I am going to give her release just drop this whole thing. It's not worth the hassle. But I do have another question since I have totally changed my contract since I dealt with this person. I would like to know what you all think of it and if im "missing" anything. 
Agreement and Consent


Date:____________
	I understand that I pay _____ up front and the rest when I meet to get 
photographs. If I do not have the money I will not Receive my photographs until 
I have the money for them. It take's ___ to ____ days to recieve my photographs
after I have choosen my photographs to be printed. If I haven't selected my
photographs in a month from the photo-shoot Renee's Photography will no 
longer be required to keep your photographs and have them printed. The money
that I have paid will be nonrefundable. After I recieved my photographs and 
everything is paid for in full the money is nonrefundable. If you buy a package
with a cd it does not mean that it automatically comes with a copyright 
release form. It does not come with one unless stated in this agreement. 


	I herby give my consent for Renee's Photography to post my pictures on 
their website for sample pictures. If I should need to get a hold of them for any 
reason I can message them online or call at (570) 447-0771.


	Photographs are to be taken at ___________ on __________. I have 
selected the Package for _____ which consists of a 
____ minute session
___ 8x10
___ 5x7
___ 4x6
___ wallets 
____ cd.
 The shooting will take place at _____________ in ________________. If I should decide
that I want more photographs then what is provided in the special it will be
____  for a 8x10 or (8) wallets. 
____ for any extra 4x6 or 5x7.


	In the event of an emergency with the photographer or client the shoot will be 
rescheduled. 




I herby agree with everything stated 


_____________________________________________


----------



## orljustin (Oct 28, 2013)

inflammatory comment deleted


----------



## curtyoungblood (Oct 28, 2013)

The most glaring problem is that your contract doesn't state the total amount to be paid. You have a spot to put the down payment, and a place to put a price for extra prints (this REALLY shouldn't be a fill in the blank, but should be a constant price printed on the contract). 

Also, you've written this contract with a tone that say you don't trust your client. You make seven points in the text of the contract, and every single one of them restricts the clients right and tells them what they can't do or how they will be punished if they don't behave. Nothing in the contract describes what you will provide and any benefit to the client. 

Finally, I don't understand why you're even offering a cd to your clients. If you don't expect them to get prints made from it, then don't offer it to them (unless you make it EXTREMELY clear that it is only for viewing on a computer). And by clear, I mean labeling it as a web cd and having a MASSIVE price difference so your client understand. You also need to know how to make it so the client isn't capable of making a decent print from it.


----------



## KmH (Oct 28, 2013)

An online photography forum is a poor source for seeking legal advice.

 Your profile does not indicate what state your business is in.
Contract law varies somewhat by state, as does model and property release laws.

You really should have an attorney licensed to practice in your state review all your business legal documents and re-write them as need so they are actionable in your state..


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 28, 2013)

orljustin said:


> Shadowwolf2008 said:
> 
> 
> > I am going to give her release just drop this whole thing. It's not worth the hassle. But I do have another question since I have totally changed my contract since I dealt with this person. I would like to know what you all think of it and if im "missing" anything.
> ...


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 28, 2013)

curtyoungblood said:


> The most glaring problem is that your contract doesn't state the total amount to be paid. You have a spot to put the down payment, and a place to put a price for extra prints (this REALLY shouldn't be a fill in the blank, but should be a constant price printed on the contract).
> 
> Also, you've written this contract with a tone that say you don't trust your client. You make seven points in the text of the contract, and every single one of them restricts the clients right and tells them what they can't do or how they will be punished if they don't behave. Nothing in the contract describes what you will provide and any benefit to the client.
> 
> Finally, I don't understand why you're even offering a cd to your clients. If you don't expect them to get prints made from it, then don't offer it to them (unless you make it EXTREMELY clear that it is only for viewing on a computer). And by clear, I mean labeling it as a web cd and having a MASSIVE price difference so your client understand. You also need to know how to make it so the client isn't capable of making a decent print from it.



Yup. have to agree with everyone else on this one - get a lawyer.

Now, I'm not a lawyer but I did play one on TV.  Ok, no, that isn't true.  However I did once have a friend who's second cousin twice removed was friends with a guy who knew a guy who's uncle on his mom's side stayed at a holiday inn express.

So no, absolutely not qualified to give advice on contract law.  Seriously doubt anyone else here would be either, as the KMH mentioned, laws vary widely from state to state on the subject.


----------



## Overread (Oct 28, 2013)

By all means ask around online and some research into the legal side of things; you'll be able to walk into the meeting with a real lawyer and ask the right questions as well as clearly state what it is that you're after. You'll save a lot of time (and that means money) doing the research outside and then going in with some idea of what is going on. Your lawyer can then help to clear matters up and formalise and finish off things.

Note a good lawyer is important to have on call - sometimes you'll need specific legal advice or you'll have a difficult client who needs dealing with. So the earlier you find yourself a lawyer the easier you make those processes later on.


----------



## Shadowwolf2008 (Oct 28, 2013)

Where I am at right now I can not afford a lawyer. And I didn't just pick this up. I went to the Art Institute of Pittsburgh for Photography


----------



## Steve5D (Oct 28, 2013)

If they signed a contract, I'd pretty much tell 'em to go piss up a rope. No one held a gun to their head to make them sign.

Ask them to specifically point out the portion of your contract which is misleading, fraudulent or "false advertising".

If they're unable to do that, you likely have little to worry about...


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Oct 28, 2013)

Taking you to court is laughable. Your fee was $55... their court costs will be 10x that amount.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Oct 28, 2013)

...and raise your rates for crying out loud.


----------



## texkam (Oct 28, 2013)

> And I didn't just pick this up. I went to the Art Institute of Pittsburgh for Photography


Ask for your money back. How does a photography school not cover this kind of basic stuff?


----------



## Overread (Oct 29, 2013)

texkam said:


> > And I didn't just pick this up. I went to the Art Institute of Pittsburgh for Photography
> 
> 
> Ask for your money back. How does a photography school not cover this kind of basic stuff?



Because if its an art course its not designed to focus on the business side of the craft; but the artistic.


----------



## orljustin (Oct 29, 2013)

Overread said:


> texkam said:
> 
> 
> > > And I didn't just pick this up. I went to the Art Institute of Pittsburgh for Photography
> ...



Then he was ripped off.  It should prepare someone to work in the field, which includes business.  Maybe he slept through the Business and Marketing classes? Catalog 2013-2014


----------



## pixmedic (Oct 29, 2013)

one and only warning for this thread. keep it civil with the new member please.


----------



## Shadowwolf2008 (Oct 29, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> one and only warning for this thread. keep it civil with the new member please.


is their a way I can just delete this thread?


----------



## manicmike (Oct 29, 2013)

Honestly, I don't see any way that someone who would pay $55 for a photography session would have the spare cash to sue. 

If it were me, I'd do what Steve said and have them point to the contract and show you exactly where you broke it. Otherwise I'd tell them to feel free to sue me for $55.


----------

