copyright

How US Copyright Law (sometimes) Fails Small Photographers

Photo District News is reporting that US Airways, it’s insurance company AIG and their lawyers have moved to prevent photographer Stephen Mallon from displaying photos of the recovery of Flight 1548, photos which he appears to own the copyright to. Mallon was hired to document the recovery process by Weeks Marine, who had given Mallon (as had the NTSB) their okay for showing the photographs involved. Mallon is asking people to contact US Air and AIG and express their displeasure on the subject. I’ve done that, but in this point, I’d like to talk, maybe even rant a bit, about the problems with the copyright system and the law as it applies to small-shop photographers like myself and Mallon. (more…)

Continue Reading

It’s time to say goodbye to the copyright

I wasn’t always a photographer. Back in the 90s I was a disc jockey. I can remember many times getting into heated discussions with young people who had called into the station about whether or not the record companies were within their rights to sue people who downloaded music. No matter how hard I tried to explain that music was a business and record companies as well as artists had a right to charge whatever they wished for the fruits of their labor, people just didn’t get it. They acted as if they had a right to the music. They believed that once they bought a song they could do whatever they wanted with it, including reproduce it and distribute it to thousands of people.

And so it was that last weekend I laid in bed unable to sleep. (more…)

Continue Reading

Copyright part 3, Protect thyself

Anyone who’s been in this business long enough has a story about being ripped off. Whether it’s about unpaid invoices, clients who make unreasonable demands, or outright fraud, my experience has been there are two types of professional photographers. Those who have been cheated, and those who will. We’ll talk about invoicing, unreasonable clients and fraud later. Right now – stolen images. (more…)

Continue Reading

Copyright, part two

Part Two – Licensing usage

Now that we’ve determined that artists are entitled to profit from their creations, we’ve got to answer the question of who actually holds the copyright, ie who owns the work. US copyright law was originally codified in 1790 but for practical purposes, the Copyright act of 1976 and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) are the laws that currently affect us. (more…)

Continue Reading

Copyright, Part One

This is the first of several in a series on copyright, as it stands in the US, and how it affects photographers.

Part One – The basics.

Photography is copyrighted intellectual property, just like books, music and software. Like musicians, authors and filmmakers, photographers are paid a fee for creating the work and then residuals or royalties for the subsequent use of those works. An artist’s ability to profit from their creations is a Constitutional right, Article 1, Section 8:

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

Not to get too political here, but… The framers realized that a stable and prosperous society is aided by the ability of the innovative and inventive to profit from their innovations and inventions. This may all seem like political mumbo jumbo, but in the face of those who think copyright is a hindrance to free expression (if you liked Napster, this means you) it’s an important rebuttal. Without the profit motive to, well, motivate us, why create.

(more…)

Continue Reading
Close Menu