|
Forums >
Digital Art and Retouching >
Retouching, Copyright Law (US Code), and community
Hello all, regarding editing photographic images I have a pretty versed idea of what sort of permissions a model would have over images taken of them and what sort of permissions a retoucher has or anyone doing image editing/altering/manipulations. I wouldn't be able to cite the US Code for the life of me on the subject though. Something about the first amendment, and something about photographers having copyrights. I've read all of Title 17 (Copyright) but I wasn't reading them with photography in mind. Also, from what I can tell, the art community has evolved its own etiquette, which have been somewhat standardized with the global art communities on the internet. These etiquettes tend to deviate from anyone's actual law and the law becomes lost. I am hoping someone can clarify what the facts are regarding copyright and edits (lets assume that a standard release and usage license exists between the model and photographer) Perhaps someone can provide examples of how and what laws are in effect with a scenario: 1. Photographer has a shoot with model. Someone sees the photo in the models port and wants to retouch it, something as simple as adjusting the levels or applying the orton effect. Nobody is requesting that the photo gets retouched. What is the right way for a retoucher to do this? Oct 23 09 02:23 am Link Well in that situation I would just get the photographers info, contact them and ask if I could retouch their photo. If you're willing to do free touch ups for them as practice, you'd probably have a good chance of them saying yes  Oct 23 09 03:23 am Link RD Satellite wrote: Good question coz I just get confused with it. I've read the rights and all..... Oct 23 09 03:43 am Link Yes, I would basically like it all spelled out. There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding about where the copyrights lie. Oct 23 09 12:41 pm Link I have also seen contract requirements from agencies/models who not only claim the copyrights after a photo-shoot, and they give permission for use only for a limited time. On other side people here tell me that the copyright stays with the photographer, even if the model has ordered and paid for the photo-session. And from what I know even if you as a photographer hold the copyright, there has to be also model's release for use too? ... and when it comes to retouching how much changes of the original can yield you claims for a copyright of the derivative work...? in the thread for "Serious retouching" it states: " For our purposes we will define a derivitive work as: A revision or change that transforms more than 40% of the original with the exception of simple retouching. " how about actual legal interpretation of this situation? how about who owns the copyright of the derivative work? Oct 23 09 01:18 pm Link RD Satellite wrote: It depends on what you're going to do with the image after you retouch it. You don't need anyone's permission to download an image and retouch it. But if you're going to sell or disseminate your retouched version, that's a different matter. Your scenario doesn't specify what you intend to do with the image. Oct 23 09 02:13 pm Link MOST of the time, the photographer owns the copyright. For anyone other than the copyright holder to use a photo, they must either get a usage license which grants permission, or be able to offer a Fair Use defense. Otherwise they have committed copyright infringement. A usage license may allow sub-licensing, so that a licensee can pass those rights on to another party. So, for example, if the photographer allowed a model to retouch images, that could be constructed to allow the model to hire a retoucher as well. Fair Use factors include things like parody, news, and educational uses of copyrighted material. The best-case scenario is for the parties to agree BEFORE the shoot as to what usage is allowed, then have a written license which conveys that agreement. That way everyone knows beforehand what to expect and there are no surprises or arguments later. Oct 23 09 04:22 pm Link |
