# Copyright Issue - How do I approach this?



## rub (Jul 10, 2009)

A recent client of mine has made copies of some low resolution images of mine - at least, that is how I am seeing it.

My photos - which were sent to her for online viewing and email sharing only:












And then today I stumble across this:


----------



## PhotoXopher (Jul 10, 2009)

It's a photo of your photos, is that really an issue?


----------



## rub (Jul 10, 2009)

She didn't purchase the prints, or the rights to make prints. I do think that is an issue.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Jul 10, 2009)

Oh, I see... it's not the photo of your photos that's the issue - it's that they made prints of the photos in the first place.

Gotcha 

Nice catch.

Send a huge bill for the rights to print your work


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 10, 2009)

That's part of the problem with sending client digital images for proofing or whatever.  They probably don't know the difference between them and high resolution files...and they probably have no understanding of copyrights etc.  What they know is that they have digital images and it's only natural for them to want to print them.  It's not right, it's not legal...but that's what it is.

Did you let them know, in no uncertain terms, that the files were not for printing?


----------



## PhotoXopher (Jul 10, 2009)

I'd do the same thing to be honest... (print them). Copyright is so hard to get a grasp on and understand.

The mentality:

"I paid you to take the photos, so if you email me them then they are mine to do with how I please."

"If I hire a photographer to take photos, I should get the photos."


----------



## rub (Jul 10, 2009)

Yes, I did.  
_____________

Hello Ashley,
I would like to invite you to view your photographs at Kristal Burgess Photography. 
Please visit my website at http://www.kristalburgessphotography.com/photocart. Click the Access Gallery link and enter in the access code below: 
Access code: XXXXXXXX

From there , you can order prints, digital files, an many other custom products.

I have also included 5 low resolution images that have been posted to your Facebook page.  These files may be used for email sharing and posting on your profile. They DO NOT include rights for printing or making copies, however.

If you have any questions, please let me know!

Thanks,
Kristal Burgess Photography
http://www.kristalburgessphotography.com/photocart


----------



## dxqcanada (Jul 10, 2009)

Have they ordering any prints from you ?


----------



## rub (Jul 10, 2009)

No prints have been ordered yet.  She had emailed me a few questions about buying the digial files, but they was some time ago now.


----------



## dxqcanada (Jul 10, 2009)

How do you know that it is your client that printed the images ?
Are you sure this is your client in the image ?
This is where it will get tough ... you could send the client a notice about copy right infringement and see if they fess up to it. ... it would be difficult to push it further than that without proof.

Maybe you should have put your Logo through the center of the proof images (watermark) ... so clients will not bother printing them.


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 10, 2009)

I wouldn't get too upset about it.  Keep a positive attitude and try to sell file/prints like any other job.  However, I hope you learned your lesson...don't send/give out files again, unless you add more protection/deterrents.  For example, you could put big/prominent water marks on files that you send.  You could put 'do not print/copy' right on the images or on the back of prints.

Getting upset about it (to the client) will only damage your reputation, which in this business, could be a big mistake.  If anything, maybe let them know that it's not OK to make prints with those files and ask them not to do it again.


----------



## KmH (Jul 10, 2009)

Bummer.


----------



## rub (Jul 10, 2009)

Thanks Mike.

Im not really upset, I just figure that I should say something - just so she knows.  I just dont know exactly what to say.

And I am very suprised that our local print shop would even make copies.  They all know me - they all know that matermarked copies and proofs and not for copying.  Its just kinda strange.

I will drop her a line and let her know the issue is a friendly way.

Thanks


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 10, 2009)

> And I am very suprised that our local print shop would even make copies. They all know me - they all know that matermarked copies and proofs and not for copying. Its just kinda strange.


So were they actually watermarked?  If so, I would have a big problem with the lab/print shop....a BIG PROBLEM.  A client can maybe be excused because they're ignorant...but a lab should know better.  Some of them have been sued over this, which is usually the first step to them being more stringent about this.  Maybe ask the client where they printed them...and then release your anger toward them.

Although, maybe the client just printed them herself.


----------



## tirediron (Jul 10, 2009)

N0YZE said:


> The mentality:
> 
> "I paid you to take the photos, so if you email me them then they are mine to do with how I please."
> 
> "If I hire a photographer to take photos, I should get the photos."


 
^^ Sadly, this is most definitely the case.  

I've had the issue crop up a few times, most recently with some barrel-racing pictures that I shot as part of a cancer fund-raiser.  It bothers me, but I have luxury of not actually _needing_ the money I make from my photography.  

If the client is going to make a reasonable print order, I would be inclined to let the incident pass, but if she/they don't, then I would contact them and request payment for the prints at your standard rate.  I wouldn't expect to actually get it, but it might push the point home.


----------



## KmH (Jul 10, 2009)

rub said:


> Thanks Mike.
> 
> Im not really upset, I just figure that I should say something - just so she knows. I just dont know exactly what to say.
> 
> ...


They could easily have been made on a home printer but like Mike I would have a BIG PROBLEM if a retail lab maked the prints.

In fact I would be asking who made the prints as I can see your biz name in the upper right corner on the one in the middle between the shoes.

I agree you have to call her out on the issue.


----------



## rub (Jul 10, 2009)

Thanks everyone - Im heading to the lab now (nice we only have 1 in town) and I will let you know what I find out.

They do have a new staff member, so that may be the issue.


----------



## photographyfanatic (Jul 11, 2009)

Out of curiosity, how did u find that picture of her with your prints?


----------



## DSPhotography (Jul 12, 2009)

probably on her facebook since that's where the proofs were sent


----------



## Pure (Jul 12, 2009)

Excuse me, excuse me.  

DON'T FRET!
I'd like to point out that you have _*not*_ been a victim of the client printing their own prints fiasco!

It's merely a picture generator.  You all know how it works, you submit a photo and it automatically edits it into the given photo, in this case a pair of woman's legs.

Look at this!

My friend:







Your client:





See, merely a picture generator, don't worry!

I hope this clears things up, and I hope the info helps!


----------



## FrankLamont (Jul 12, 2009)

Even if the above is the case, the photos were entered into the generator and produced this, which she used...


----------



## Pure (Jul 12, 2009)

The point is is that she DID NOT have them printed, it's only the low resolution jpegs put into an online picture generator, meaning nothing has been printed by her, as far as we know.


----------



## FrankLamont (Jul 12, 2009)

Where is the generator, by the way?

Seems... an odd thing to do. 

That's true, though... the photographer did specify the permission of putting it on her Facebook profile.


----------



## rabhobbes (Jul 12, 2009)

Pure said:


> Excuse me, excuse me.
> 
> DON'T FRET!
> I'd like to point out that you have _*not*_ been a victim of the client printing their own prints fiasco!
> ...


 

Wow, did not see that coming.  I agree, looks like she did not have them printed.  Weird!


----------



## mschoelen (Jul 12, 2009)

I never understood why you pay a photographer, and then they own the rights to the photos so that they can charge you again (for pictures or the rights.)  I was recently married and that is how it was with our photographer (in addition to other complaints) however I do know it's common.  But on the other hand it does look like someone has cracked the case.


----------



## rub (Jul 12, 2009)

Pure,

Thnks so much - I actually went back to look at the photos, and I found the same thing- she had made several different ones (maybe 15 in total) with the picture generator. I didn't see that coming either!

I sent her an email about the issue, and she completely understood and removed the album.  She is also going to be ordering some prints right away.

PS - where did you find that generator?

Thanks,
Kristal


----------



## Pure (Jul 12, 2009)

rub said:


> Pure,
> 
> Thnks so much - I actually went back to look at the photos, and I found the same thing- she had made several different ones (maybe 15 in total) with the picture generator. I didn't see that coming either!
> 
> ...



No problem, I just didn't want something bad between you and your client to happen.  

As for the generator, I have no idea, I remembered seeing that picture on my friend's facebook some months ago, and I knew the photo from this thread looked very familiar, so I looked there and found it.

I can find out though, if you care.

Good luck with the sale!

Colin


----------



## NateS (Jul 13, 2009)

mschoelen said:


> I never understood why you pay a photographer, and then they own the rights to the photos so that they can charge you again (for pictures or the rights.)  I was recently married and that is how it was with our photographer (in addition to other complaints) however I do know it's common.  But on the other hand it does look like someone has cracked the case.



Because you are paying the photographer for a service, not a product.  The service is their abilities to photograph you (which is what determines how good the product you may buy will be).  Once you've paid for the service, you are then presented with a product that you might want to buy....those are the prints.

Look at it this way...:

Your transmission goes out in your car (assume it's a chevy) so you go to your local Chevy dealer and have them replace the tranny.  When you get the bill YOU WERE CHARGED TWICE.  The bill says Labor = $400 and Parts = $900.  That's because you paid for both a service (the labor), and the product (the transmission).

Same basic principle applies to the photography business.


----------



## DSPhotography (Jul 13, 2009)

NateS said:


> mschoelen said:
> 
> 
> > I never understood why you pay a photographer, and then they own the rights to the photos so that they can charge you again (for pictures or the rights.)  I was recently married and that is how it was with our photographer (in addition to other complaints) however I do know it's common.  But on the other hand it does look like someone has cracked the case.
> ...



That's a great way of putting it.. I'll have to keep that in mind.. though I'd love to know where you live that has a chevy dealer that'd only charge $400 labor for a transmission


----------



## Baaaark (Jul 13, 2009)

I'm not a pro, but I come in here to hopefully learn some stuff.

I will say that people don't get it.  People don't understand how or why you should charge them when its digital photos and "only costs" so much in getting them developed (they usually assume on wal-mart pricing too).

They don't understand there is cost for you to blow 5+ hours of a Saturday on them, to post process all of that stuff for hours on end, to present everything in a professional manner, none of it.  They see you point, and shoot, and they think that's all there is to it.

You did the right thing by charging for the services.  If they don't understand (like a lot of people) how much it takes to make quality wedding photos, then so be it.

I'd also ask them straight out why they didn't use you.  They either thought you were too much, or not good enough (or a combination of both), either way, they don't know any better (your price was reasonable, and I've seen your work).


----------



## NateS (Jul 13, 2009)

DSPhotography said:


> NateS said:
> 
> 
> > mschoelen said:
> ...



Well....let's say it's a Chevy Aveo.  Their tranny's are probably just held on by zip ties...lol. (I kid....actually own two GM products).


----------

