# Municipality's RFP for photography wants to own the copyright... is it worth it?



## epp_b (Jun 16, 2010)

I'm reading over a Request for Proposal that was sent out by the municipal government (small town of ~4,000).  They are looking for professional-quality photographs, to place in a digital archive, which they would use promotionally for the town.  They're willing to pay up to $2,000 for a body of work that includes photos of local events and activities throughout the year.

The only thing that concerns me is the line about the RFP is this line: *"Rights for photos will belong to the [town]"*.  Now, this is somewhat ambiguous and I suspect that there may be some naivety in the person who wrote this as to just what, exactly, this means.  Whether it means that the town wants to own the full copyright (meaning I can't use them for my portfolio, I can't sell them, etc.) or whether the town just needs a set of rights to use the photos for promotional purposes is something that I have yet to determine.

The town does have a lawyer and maybe he had a hand in writing the RFP, so let's say, for now, that the town wants to actually own the copyrights.  If this is the case, I'm leaning towards "no" ... what do you think?


----------



## tirediron (Jun 16, 2010)

I would verify what is meant, and if they do want the copyright, counter-offer with a non-exclusive license of unlimited use in perpituity.  If they insisted on copyright, that probably wouldn't bother me greatly, but $2000 doesn't buy a very large body of work, so a lot would depend on the quantity of images they expected.


----------



## Flash Harry (Jun 16, 2010)

Take their hand off, 2 grand for a few headshots/summer fetes and other small town garbage seems like a deal to me, charge seperately for your shoot/process time and your laughing, jumped up local gov twits with plenty funds to waste sounds like you could be earning for a while to come. Its normal here to relinquish copyright for commissioned work like this, tearsheets of whatever they publish are your portfolio. H


----------



## epp_b (Jun 16, 2010)

> I would verify what is meant, and if they do want the copyright,  counter-offer with a non-exclusive license of unlimited use in  perpituity


That's exactly what I was thinking.



> Take their hand off, 2 grand for a few headshots/summer fetes and other  small town garbage seems like a deal to me, charge seperately for your  shoot/process time and your laughing, jumped up local gov twits with  plenty funds to waste sounds like you could be earning for a while to  come. Its normal here to relinquish copyright for commissioned work like  this, tearsheets of whatever they publish are your portfolio. H


I've read this three times and I still don't understand what you're trying to say.


----------



## Flash Harry (Jun 16, 2010)

Take the money, charge for every shoot, the 2 grand is for copyright release, and any of your work in print you use the magazine page for your portfolio.

Read the copyright act, copyright is not always retained by the photographer in commercial/editorial work, these people wish to commission you, give them the rights they won't be demanding you can't have the shots in your portfolio, (originals) or a magazine tear sheet. 

From experience local government officials are a bunch of tossers spending ratepayers money, there is plenty available even in a small town, now, go get your share. HH


----------



## KmH (Jun 16, 2010)

I believe Flash Harry is saying, make your own proposal, that is, a pay as you produce deal, and pretend you never saw their RFP.

Copyright is for the life of the creator + 50 years in the "True North Cold and Freezing" (if that means Canada).

However as I understand it, in Canada copyright is owned by whoever commissioned the work (the client). So, portrait photographers only get copyright ownership if there is a copyright transfer clause in their contract whereby the client signs copyright over to the photographer.

As tirediron said, $2000 doesn't buy a very extensive "body of work" that also includes the use terms *"Rights for photos will belong to the [town]"*.


----------



## pbelarge (Jun 16, 2010)

I do not know if you are a published photographer, but this sounds like a good deal for a beginner.

Lets see;

1. you get published in town and who knows where - cost, oh you are getting paid

2. People get to see your work, which could develop into who knows what - cost, oh you are getting paid

Do you notice a trend.

The only dim light here is that you may not be the only person who is thinking like I am...


----------



## Christie Photo (Jun 16, 2010)

The copyright isn't an issue for me.  I'm certain they will agree to allow you to use the images for self-promotion.  And...  they're likely to agree that you can sell prints to the people you shoot.  They just want to be able to use the photos anywhere, anytime, as often as they like and for any use.

What IS an issue for me is an open-ended time agreement.  Be sure you specify just how much time they can book you before incurring additional costs. (how many hours, or how many events)

-Pete


----------



## epp_b (Jun 16, 2010)

> Take the money, charge for every shoot, the 2 grand is for copyright  release, and any of your work in print you use the magazine page for  your portfolio.


I see your point here, but that's not going to work.

They aren't going to take kindly to spending $2,000 on "copyright release", something they can't hold in their hands or see on a computer screen.  They want to spend $2,000 (or less) and for that to be the end of it; they aren't looking to do "work for hire" shoots.  The RFP specifically states, word for word, "Project not to exceed $2,000.00 which is to include all photo rights".



> I do not know if you are a published photographer, but this sounds like a  good deal for a beginner.


No doubt it is, I just want to make sure I'm not being taken advantage of.  That's why I came here to ask these questions to people who know more about the "businessy" stuff than I do.



> The copyright isn't an issue for me.  I'm certain they will agree to  allow you to use the images for self-promotion.  And...  they're likely  to agree that you can sell prints to the people you shoot.  They just  want to be able to use the photos anywhere, anytime, as often as they  like and for any use.


I suspect so, yes.  I just think that the best balance in this context is that I retain the actual copyright and give them a fairly open-ended license; ie.: they can use the photos solely for municipal promotion with no time limitations, but I retain the full copyright to do whatever I want with the photos.



> What IS an issue for me is an open-ended time agreement.  Be sure you  specify just how much time they can book you before incurring additional  costs. (how many hours, or how many events)


Somehow, I don't think they're interested in going into the detail of booking time.  I foresee a fairly simple arrangement: I take a bunch of pictures in the specified context, I supply them to the town, the town pays me the agreed-upon amount, the end.

However, you did give me a good idea in terms of how many photos I should be prepared to provide to them based on based on how much time I'll spend creating said photos.


----------



## Flash Harry (Jun 17, 2010)

2 Grand isn't a large amount of money, especially if they want you to attend a lot of events, I'd find out how many events and their locations, if they're out of town then they'll cost you both in time and money. The upside is the free publicity. I would still consider the work depending on the number of gigs, I'd stipulate that any published photo credits you and also that you can use the images for your portfolio. I'd give it a miss if they want you to be at their beck and call over the period, tops I'd do four shoots. H


----------



## pbelarge (Jun 17, 2010)

Remember, this is an RFP. Potentially, there could be 10s if not 100s of respondents. 

I would say it depends on where you are in your career and how badly you want this exposure.

When new in business, the inexperienced and hungry generally will go a lot further to get a foot in the door. Only you know what you may be willing to do to land this.

Good luck - let us know if you respond to the RFP, and the results if you do.


----------



## epp_b (Jun 17, 2010)

> Remember, this is an RFP. Potentially, there could be 10s if not 100s of  respondents.


Actually, the proposals were due two weeks ago, but I only found out about the RFP yesterday.  I was told that proposals will still be accepted until the end of this week and that they have received very few so far.



> 2 Grand isn't a large amount of money, especially if they want you to  attend a lot of events, I'd find out how many events and their  locations, if they're out of town then they'll cost you both in time and  money. The upside is the free publicity. I would still consider the  work depending on the number of gigs, I'd stipulate that any published  photo credits you and also that you can use the images for your  portfolio. I'd give it a miss if they want you to be at their beck and  call over the period, tops I'd do four shoots. H


Based on a worksheet I threw together for myself to calculate the hours I'd spend on every aspect of the project (shooting, processing, networking, etc.), it basically comes out to minimum wage.  I guess I just have to decide if the exposure and experience will make up for that.


----------



## ghache (Jun 17, 2010)

make sure they dont make 233423 events trough the year and your not ending up doing 200 hours of shooting/editing and if its not bad, take the 2k and never look back. what your going to take picture of enyway? do you plan on selling those pictures to someone else? they will probably agree that you use theses picture in your portfolio/website.

if you sign the full copyright of the pictures to the town, they only own the pictures you handled them. anything else is yours. 


i


----------



## Dwig (Jun 17, 2010)

ghache said:


> ...
> if you sign the full copyright of the pictures to the town, they only own the pictures you handled them. anything else is yours.



I would suggest that the contract specifically state this. You don't want any implication that they acquire all rights to all images you make at a certain event. That way, if the event is such that you might want to retain some images for yourself you can.


----------



## skieur (Jun 17, 2010)

A different approach is to limit the number of photos that they can choose from for the $2,000 and in the contract indicate that the photographer retains the rights to all photos taken and not chosen/used by the municipality.

They get what they paid for...a certain number of photos for $2,000 and you get the rights to any photos not chosen.

skieur


----------

