Image ownership & credit

[Warren_L]

With all this talk of copyright infringement, I thought I'd put a little bit of a different spin on the topic. I've been wondering this for a while, but haven't really come to any conclusion.

Most of my diving involves shooting pictures. My usual buddies do not generally have cameras primarily because I have mine all the time my rig is fairly high end compared to what my buddies have, so I'm the default photog for our dives. Not much of a problem from that respect as this has been going on for quite some time.

On occasion, I will hand off my camera to my buddy to take a few shots. Usually of me (but not always). As photographers, you tend not to get many pictures of yourself (at least that's how it is for me). That's just the way it is.

So, my question is simply, who has the ownership and/or credit of the image taken when the camera is handed off? The camera gear is mine - I own, setup and maintain it. I pack the housing, choose the lens, bring it to the dive, descend with it, deploy the arms and strobes, and select the camera and strobe settings. If I then hand it off to a buddy who then frames and presses the shutter release, then who has the ownership and/or credit of the image taken? Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with giving credit where credit is due. Just wondering what everyone's thoughts on this is.

 

[Diver Dennis]

Excellent question Warren.

 

[Dave Zimmerly]

As an Art Director and Designer, whoever owns the camera owns the image.

If the shot is to be sold or used for commercial purposes, then give credit to the person for the shot but if it is captured on your roll of film or stored in your memory card, it's yours.

Dave (aka "Squirt")

 

[bladephotog]

As an Art Director and Designer, whoever owns the camera owns the image.

If the shot is to be sold or used for commercial purposes, then give credit to the person for the shot but if it is captured on your roll of film or stored in your memory card, it's yours.

Dave (aka "Squirt")

I'm not so certain of this. It's a great question. My newspaper supplies my gear yet copyright is split 50/50. Not sure if this is law or company policy though. I'll try to check.

Does it get even more confusing when you start talking intellectual property rights? They may own the gear but it's my vision. I don't know?

 

[justleesa]

Good question!!

Does it get even more confusing when you start talking intellectual property rights? They may own the gear but it's my vision. I don't know?

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Taking the picture would be my composition not that of the owner of the camera. Looking forward to what you find out.

 

[Jeff Toorish]

As an Art Director and Designer, whoever owns the camera owns the image.

If the shot is to be sold or used for commercial purposes, then give credit to the person for the shot but if it is captured on your roll of film or stored in your memory card, it's yours.

Dave (aka "Squirt")

I know this is true if it is "work for hire," but I'm not sure that would apply when merely handing off the camera to a buddy to snap a shot. If the buddy is not an employee or otherwise working for Warren, he or she might be able to make a case that the shot is his or her intellectual property and, as such, would own the copyright.

I am not an attorney so maybe one of the "legal mods" might weigh in on this.

Frankly, I've always wondered about this myself.

Great question, Warren.

Jeff

 

[bladephotog]

I know this is true if it is "work for hire," but I'm not sure that would apply when merely handing off the camera to a buddy to snap a shot. If the buddy is not an employee or otherwise working for Warren, he or she might be able to make a case that the shot is his or her intellectual property and, as such, would own the copyright.

I am not an attorney so maybe one of the "legal mods" might weigh in on this.

Frankly, I've always wondered about this myself.

Great question, Warren.

Jeff

Good point about the work for hire. I'd forgotten about that.

We had a case recently where a painting was made from a photo one of our staff photographers made. He happened to be the one assigned to cover an art show and he saw it there. It was an exact replica of his photo in oil. I know our lawyer was all over it but I don't know what the result was. Another thing I'll have to check on!

 

[Jeff Toorish]

Looking at Warren's question from the other perspective, namely, that of a buddy snapping a photo: I would be extremely cranky if I took a shot of a friend, even using his camera, and that shot wound up on the cover of Time magazine.

I think I'd sue.

Jeff

 

[Warren_L]

I've thought of a number of different scenarios, but the lines in this case still seem to be muddled.

At first, I thought that since it was my setup and I went to the trouble of getting it ready for the dive, it would be fairly simple. My camera, my images. But the more I think about it, it doesn't seem quite so simple and clean cut.

Pictures that are not framed by me (and especially those pictures of myself) are not necessarily shots that I could have gotten otherwise, without the intervention of another person/photographer, even though it is with the use of my gear. This, to me, imparts a degree of involvement from someone else, so the production of that image was not solely 100% attributable to me.

If, for example, I didn't have a camera rig for underwater use and I wanted to go shoot some pictures on a dive, and I asked a buddy who had a camera if I could use borrow it, does this mean my buddy owns the images that I took with his camera setup? Would it matter much if he were there with me on the dive perhaps?

 

[Diver Dennis]

I think as far as the first scenario where your buddy takes your picture, if you talked about it topside and said "Would you do me a favor and take my picture on this dive?", that would be a verbal contract and he would have no claim?

The second scenario could be where you ask him to lend you your camera and take some shots for yourself. When he agreed to lend it to you he had no expectation of profit, other than a beer maybe and therefore you would own the images.

This is all pure speculation on my part, based on a verbal contract and his expectations at that time.