Photographer
Cherrystone
Posts: 37171
Columbus, Ohio, US
Star wrote:
You are hired by a performer who will be performing at a specific club. You are not hired by the club, nor is the performer an employee of the club.
The set that you'll be photographing starts at 10 PM and goes till 12 AM.
At 1130 the manager of the club comes to you. Only at that point they had to do a contract they want you to sign that states that you will provide them with all media recorded and collected on that date, and agree that you will post their watermark on any image that you place anywhere on any website. This would include images that you use in your personal portfolio.
Remember the club is not your employer, the performers your employer. You have no affiliation with the club, nor the club offering it any renumeration for your images.
This contract was not given to you until you had almost completed your job, even though you've been on the premises since 9 PM.
What would you do?
If you signed the agreement could there be a case for the coercion because the club waited such a long time to request the agreement and stated that if you did not sign it he would never again get club privileges? In addition you know if you don't sign the agreement you won't get paid by your employer, the performer, and so then you will have done a job and will be unable to collect payment How do you consistently find so much drama in your business situations?
Retrospect is a funny thing. I would've gotten paid a healthy part of the agreed amount before I even showed up. Having the client clear this ahead of time with the club, and in writing of some sort, would've been another thing I would've done. But I digress...
Someone said public property premise.....no such thing.
That you were there shooting for the time you were I think would constitute implied consent on some level, until the moment they came to you. Anything shot after that could be more problematic.
My first impulse would've been telling them to stuff it. But generally I know better to run my mouth impulsively.
I might have just signed it, and go ahead and do whatever I please without worrying about what I agreed to. The agreement might not hold water legally, and how much $$$ are they really going to spend to try and pursue things legally?
Photographer
Cherrystone
Posts: 37171
Columbus, Ohio, US
Aaron Lewis Photography wrote:
IF it's a public building and a public event, No such animal exists. There can be implied consents, but it is still private property.
Photographer
Managing Light
Posts: 2678
Salem, Virginia, US
studio36uk wrote:
Assuming that Star had no prior notice of the club's objections then the club should go and lick monkey's nuts before she should be expected to sign off on their "contract".
The bottom line is that if she was almost done in any case she could have just packed up, not signed their "contract" and walked off with her client's photos. What the hell could they do about it? Nothing!
Studio36 Not quite: Star and the performer could end up going eyeball-to-eyeball with the club's attorney. No one needs that kind of hassle.
Photographer
studio36uk
Posts: 22898
Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna
Managing Light wrote:
studio36uk wrote:
Assuming that Star had no prior notice of the club's objections then the club should go and lick monkey's nuts before she should be expected to sign off on their "contract".
The bottom line is that if she was almost done in any case she could have just packed up, not signed their "contract" and walked off with her client's photos. What the hell could they do about it? Nothing!
Studio36 Not quite: Star and the performer could end up going eyeball-to-eyeball with the club's attorney. No one needs that kind of hassle. On the other hand I would be inclined to say: Bring it on!
She had no contract with the club; also, she had no notice [actual or constructive] that she could NOT shoot there UNTIL she was there for some time and almost done with shooting based on the agreement with the performer [her client] - and - UNTIL the club management approached her with their demands. The absolute worst that could have happened on the day was that they could have asked her to stop shooting and leave the club. She would be been obliged to do so if told.; and, afterwards they might have tried to obtain an injunction regarding the images, but there is absolutely no guarantee the club would have actually gotten such an injunction against Star. The performer's use of the images, maybe, but not her.
They could not legally seize her images or equipment and they could not force her to delete the images.
Beyond all that, they could also simply tell her never to come back, with or without her camera. Considering their attitude and their demands - that would have been no great loss!
That kind of hassle is fully a part of doing business.
Studio36
Photographer
Loki Studio
Posts: 3523
Royal Oak, Michigan, US
My basic strategy would be:
1) "The performer hired me. Let's discuss with them after the show."
2) "My contract with my client prevents me from distributing images without their permission."
3) Sign the contract with a fake name, get the client to void it after the event, or claim duress.
Most artists feel sympathy for rights grabs like these. If a band found out at the last second that a condition of performing at a club was giving permission to record and release a DVD of their performance-they would have a serious problem.
Photographer
Solas
Posts: 10390
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Star wrote:
You are hired by a performer who will be performing at a specific club. You are not hired by the club, nor is the performer an employee of the club.
The set that you'll be photographing starts at 10 PM and goes till 12 AM.
At 1130 the manager of the club comes to you. Only at that point they had to do a contract they want you to sign that states that you will provide them with all media recorded and collected on that date, and agree that you will post their watermark on any image that you place anywhere on any website. This would include images that you use in your personal portfolio.
Remember the club is not your employer, the performers your employer. You have no affiliation with the club, nor the club offering it any renumeration for your images.
This contract was not given to you until you had almost completed your job, even though you've been on the premises since 9 PM.
What would you do?
If you signed the agreement could there be a case for the coercion because the club waited such a long time to request the agreement and stated that if you did not sign it he would never again get club privileges? In addition you know if you don't sign the agreement you won't get paid by your employer, the performer, and so then you will have done a job and will be unable to collect payment I'd sign it, get paid, get the releases necessary for the venue, build the relationship with them and milk the business relationship to my, and our, mutual business advantage.
I'd also let them know I've got an assistant I'll be bringing alongwith, Andrew Thomas Evans, who will be showing up to mule our gear around and learn from my epicness. 
Photographer
Andrew Thomas Evans
Posts: 24079
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Karl Johnston wrote:
I'd sign it, get paid, get the releases necessary for the venue, build the relationship with them and milk the business relationship to my advantage.
I'd also let them know I've got an assistant I'll be bringing alongwith, Andrew Thomas Evans, who will be showing up and learning from my epicness. Normally I'd agree with you, however some relationships will only beat you up rather than foster anything beneficial or $$. If the club was legit and a major venue, then yes, it would be worth talking and working things out, if it's just some random ass small place that doesn't have anything worthwhile then no, it wouldn't be worth it to work something out.
Plus, I wouldn't want to sign something like that since the club isn't my client and I wouldn't want them getting access to the same images or any images without the clients knowing about it.
Which is why I'd consider formatting the card in front of the person asking me to sign and walk out. That would take them by surprise, they would think that (at least for a little while, long enough to leave) the photos are all gone, and it'd be more fun than arguing with someone - assuming of course that I have all the shots needed.
Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com
Photographer
Studio MD - Casting
Posts: 1227
Los Angeles, California, US
Small Fruit Pits wrote:
How do you consistently find so much drama in your business situations? exactly....
Photographer
Solas
Posts: 10390
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Andrew Thomas Evans wrote:
Normally I'd agree with you, however some relationships will only beat you up rather than foster anything beneficial or $$. If the club was legit and a major venue, then yes, it would be worth talking and working things out, if it's just some random ass small place that doesn't have anything worthwhile then no, it wouldn't be worth it to work something out.
Plus, I wouldn't want to sign something like that since the club isn't my client and I wouldn't want them getting access to the same images or any images without the clients knowing about it.
Which is why I'd consider formatting the card in front of the person asking me to sign and walk out. That would take them by surprise, they would think that (at least for a little while, long enough to leave) the photos are all gone, and it'd be more fun than arguing with someone - assuming of course that I have all the shots needed.
Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com True eh, true..
Photographer
studio36uk
Posts: 22898
Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna
Small Fruit Pits wrote:
How do you consistently find so much drama in your business situations? Some people are born into drama; some earn it; and some have it thrust upon them.
Studio36
Photographer
Photos by Lorrin
Posts: 7026
Eugene, Oregon, US
Another issue, In my mind if you show up for a job and through no fault of yours you can not shoot because the client did not get proper clearance.
I think they still owe you for the shoot (or at least some portion of it)
At least that is the way many wedding shooters work.
Photographer
Camerosity
Posts: 5805
Saint Louis, Missouri, US
Lorin Edmonds wrote:
Another issue, In my mind if you show up for a job and through no fault of yours you can not shoot because the client did not get proper clearance.
I think they still owe you for the shoot (or at least some portion of it)
At least that is the way many wedding shooters work. That's why you get a nonrefundable retainer (not to be confused with a deposit, which is refundable).
Photographer
Toto Photo
Posts: 3757
Belmont, California, US
I would have signed it with the date and time. Then I would have posted only pictures shot before 11:30, in essence before the contract was in place, without their logo and 11:31 onward with their logo.
Photographer
Orca Bay Images
Posts: 33877
Arcata, California, US
Loki Studio wrote:
3) Sign the contract with a fake name Wouldn't that be fraud?
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12117
Tampa, Florida, US
This is nothing more than a rights grab. It's not a coincidence that the venue waited until you had collected enough photos before they approached you. They wanted to make sure you had enough images before they approached you. "Hey, she's already done the work. What's she going to do with them. Of course she'll agree just to get something out of it."
What I am confused about is why, if the performer is your employer, you would fear not getting paid unless you sign the venue's contract? Unless you're thinking you would refuse to release the images to the performer under those terms...without additional compensation that went beyond the initial agreement with the performer.
In either case, I would advise the venue to negotiate their terms with the performer as their demands have no bearing on your existing agreement with the performer (employer).
They probably had already approached the performer and were referred to you because they had no clue what was ethical or standard practice.
I basically would act as if the venue didn't approach me and perform my services as usual. Not taking any images after they approached.
However, after releasing the images and receiving payment from the performer I would include a note on the invoice that any additional licensing and usage beyond that agreement/payment be negotiated with the photographer.
That would prevent them from paying you the agreed upon amount but then going behind your back and either caving or negotiating their own deal with the expanded terms the venue wanted from you.
Photographer
TomFRohwer
Posts: 1601
Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Star wrote:
You are hired by a performer who will be performing at a specific club. You are not hired by the club, nor is the performer an employee of the club.
The set that you'll be photographing starts at 10 PM and goes till 12 AM.
At 1130 the manager of the club comes to you. Only at that point they had to do a contract they want you to sign that states that you will provide them with all media recorded and collected on that date, and agree that you will post their watermark on any image that you place anywhere on any website. This would include images that you use in your personal portfolio.
Remember the club is not your employer, the performers your employer. You have no affiliation with the club, nor the club offering it any renumeration for your images.
This contract was not given to you until you had almost completed your job, even though you've been on the premises since 9 PM.
What would you do? First:
I would have checked all formalities with the club long before the day of the shooting. I would have checked this immediately after the performer offered me the job - and before accepting the job.
I would have told the performer: "Let us check with the club whether there might be any obstacles."
That's just a matter of experience. I did some of public relations photography for WarnerElectraAtlantic in Germany between 1979 and 1983 (ACDC and such stuff) and I learned that even the public relations people of a major music label sometimes can muddle a photo job their own company had ordered...
Second:
I would have refused to sign anything and if necessary I would have ended that shooting.
Maybe I then would not be able to use these photographs. Then I would have to decide whether I would recourse the performer. That's a matter of circumstances. Did I have significant costs? Or not? Is it a renowned performer? Or a newcomer? Is the performer snubbed by this as I am? Etc.pp.
Photographer
TomFRohwer
Posts: 1601
Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Andrew Thomas Evans wrote:
Depending on the venue, and since most of it has been shot, I would either have them talk with the band/artist or (and more fun) I'd just say no - if they were being a dick about it I'd format the card in front of them and tell them to go away - and recover the shots later.
Or, I'd sign it as Karl Johnston and give his email address on their forms.
 That's the newshound's way. I like this way. Ever did since my AP days.
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45198
San Juan Bautista, California, US
John David Studio wrote:
Read this from ASMP:
Property and Model Releases
Intro
Why you need releases
A release is a written agreement between you and the person you are photographing, or the person who owns the property you are photographing. The purpose of the release is to protect you from any future lawsuits the person might file for claims such as defamation and invasion of privacy. You cut and pasted all that, but most of it has little or nothing to do with photographing bands, because it's more of a editorial or journalistic endeavor when shooting music events. Mostly, I think she should join in on the conversations of this group; http://www.facebook.com/MusicPhotographers
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45198
San Juan Bautista, California, US
Peach Jones wrote:
In hindsight you should have cleared it through the club to shoot there. Kind of like when a bride hires you to shoot her wedding, but the church has certain rules you must abide by. This is the same situation. If you really want to work there again just sign the paper and give them copies of all you have done, and also give the performer the same thing. Both parties are happy. It is an annoyance (and a bit stupid) but in the end it won't be any great sacrifice to you. This is an interesting point! I think it is important to investigate new venues ... be it a church or nightclub, before shooting, at least I try to do so! Often times I've found that people will treat those they've seen before better in this music photography industry than they do new folks.
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45198
San Juan Bautista, California, US
Rik Austin wrote:
Yep. Befuddled. Good approach. Sometimes even works with cops.
If you are nasty people will respond in kind. If you lose it, it's over. "Yes, I need help, umm ... I'm supposed to be photographing a Mr. Steven Tyler ... he's the lead singer of the band playing tonight? Yes, here are my credentials ... the publicist ..Ms so and so gave me the approval. The band is called something like Arrow-smith I believe?" LOL It works every time!
The key to concert photography is not only in technique of shooting, but in knowing the business. I am nice to everyone because I don't know who they know, or what they maybe able to do for me. That means if I don't know a particular bands publicist, I may need to call the venue booking agent and nicely get that information from them at least two weeks or more in advance. Then I follow up on that connection. Make those calls, be appreciative and be on time to the event!
Once at the event, don't behave like an arrogant asshole "hotshot" photographer. DO NOT brag about your past work, nor talk about the people you worked around ... good or bad. The man out on the club or venue floor sweeping with a broom
Photographer
Star
Posts: 17966
Los Angeles, California, US
TomFRohwer wrote:
First:
I would have checked all formalities with the club long before the day of the shooting. I would have checked this immediately after the performer offered me the job - and before accepting the job.
I would have told the performer: "Let us check with the club whether there might be any obstacles." Like many venues this one books single performers months in advance. I would never go behind the performers back and contact the venue, they could easily see the performer as being high maintenance and I could even cost them their booking. I would be very upset if someone I hired called our shoot location and talked with the manager, it just isn't their place.
I had photographed in this venue once before while on assignment with LA Weekly and had no problems. As soon as I came to the venue, an hour early, I introduced myself to everyone at the club.
I even had the pass codes to get into the locked production booth at the top and the stage door. Given to me by the club manager before the set started.
Photographer
Patrick Walberg
Posts: 45198
San Juan Bautista, California, US
Small Fruit Pits wrote:
Retrospect is a funny thing. Yes, it is!
Small Fruit Pits wrote:
I might have just signed it, and go ahead and do whatever I please without worrying about what I agreed to. The agreement might not hold water legally, and how much $$$ are they really going to spend to try and pursue things legally? I don't know either ... I might have signed it too? The way I look at these things is learning experiences. What's the worst thing that can happen? You don't sign something and the band doesn't pay you? You sign something and the club venue sues you? You act like a jerk, get thrown out of the place and get your camera broken in the process? I mean really, what's a signature on a piece of paper going to do? If you don't get the pictures, then you don't get paid. If the band has money to pay you an advance deposit, that would be the best case scenario.
Photographer
Kawika Photography
Posts: 110
San Diego, California, US
Yeah, there's a reason a property release exists. You're on their property and everything that happens there needs permission. They could definitely make your life miserable if they wanted to. Just do whatever they want because then they'll know you get it and if you ever want to shoot there again there will be minimal hassle. Also they may call you to come shoot an event or act and will likely over time relax their demands. It's just mutual back scratching. Grow some nails and play the game. It's worth it. GL
Edit: Removed is theirs comment, not right.
Photographer
Star
Posts: 17966
Los Angeles, California, US
Kawika Photography wrote:
You're on their property and everything that happens there is theirs. not actually true.
Photographer
TerrysPhotocountry
Posts: 4649
Rochester, New York, US
Have them talk to the person that runs the band. Because these are the bands images.
Photographer
291
Posts: 11911
SEQUOIA NATIONAL PARK, California, US
i ran into this once with some young tuff while shooting at the house of blues on sunset. i told him to fuck off, i'm working for the band. the manager then approached and i told him i'll take it up with the band and if they didn't come out for the next set then it will be up to him to take the stage to explain it.
stand your ground.
Photographer
fsp
Posts: 3656
New York, New York, US
Let the client deal with the club.. they signed your contract.. you work for them n no one else. If you are threatened to sign by the bar sying you can't shoot anymore.. they broke your contract with the client not you.... walk out n give no pics to anyone till you get paid in full on the spot cash or gold... you're obligated to your contract with the client.
also never break a contract with a client.. you haven't a leg to stand on trying to collect your money in small claims court. if you signed ANOTHER contrat with the bar, plus hold one with the client, you broke your deal to the client.. he doesn't have to give you squat anymore since you sold their material without permission.
So who do you really work for then?
Photographer
Light and Lens Studio
Posts: 3450
Sisters, Oregon, US
The F-Stop wrote:
Let the client deal with the club.. they signed your contract.. you work for them n no one else. If you are threatened to sign by the bar sying you can't shoot anymore.. they broke your contract with the client not you.... walk out n give no pics to anyone till you get paid in full on the spot cash or gold... you're obligated to your contract with the client.
also never break a contract with a client.. you haven't a leg to stand on trying to collect your money in small claims court. if you signed ANOTHER contrat with the bar, plus hold one with the client, you broke your deal to the client.. he doesn't have to give you squat anymore since you sold their material without permission.
So who do you really work for then? This is close. Personally, I wouldn't sign any contract with the club. But, I'd tell the performer and let him work it out with the club. If that didn't resolve the issue, I'd tell the club to "Sit on it and spin".
Photographer
Loki Studio
Posts: 3523
Royal Oak, Michigan, US
Orca Bay Images wrote:
Wouldn't that be fraud? Its a last resort, but I don't really have a big problem with fraud when somebody is using coercion to interfere with my ability to service my clients simply because they want photos from me for free.
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4144
New York, New York, US
I'd direct them to the performer and say they're paying me, the photos are for them, me signing this means nothing.
If they were persistent, I'd sign it, and give the club a full refund when I breached the contract.
Photographer
Garry k
Posts: 30130
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Having been caught in the triangle of artist , promoter and club not being in agreement on such matters before when attempting to shoot concerts - I have learned the hard way to ensure everyone is on the same page from the outset
Photographer
Leonard Gee Photography
Posts: 18096
Sacramento, California, US
Part of the questions I always ask for every job.
1. How will these images be used?
2. Who is the client and who do I bill?
After that, if someone comes to me with a request, I explain they have to clear it with my client and that transfers to a third party aren't covered by my contract and are specifically prohibited without written permission. If the client didn't cover the usage before I accepted the job, it's not happening without a change in the contract.
You should have clearly known what the usage would be or made stipulations before accepting the job.
Otherwise you say, "Sorry, you aren't my client and those usage rights were not stipulated before the job and not part of my original agreement with my client".
Photographer
Exterminate
Posts: 65
Seattle, Washington, US
K E E L I N G wrote:
Since I was hired by the performer I would let it be his call. He's paying me so I've got no reason to use the images, so it's entirely his call.
I consider it his responsibility to have secured permissions from the club, and since he didn't he has the choice of agreeing to their watermark and stipulations or not. No matter his decision, I would demand on getting paid anyway for doing the work in good faith.
Whether the final result has their watermark on it or not is no concern to me, I was simply a hired gun. Yeh.
Photographer
Colored Photos
Posts: 192
Los Angeles, California, US
Star wrote:
You are hired by a performer who will be performing at a specific club. You are not hired by the club, nor is the performer an employee of the club.
The set that you'll be photographing starts at 10 PM and goes till 12 AM.
At 1130 the manager of the club comes to you. Only at that point they had to do a contract they want you to sign that states that you will provide them with all media recorded and collected on that date, and agree that you will post their watermark on any image that you place anywhere on any website. This would include images that you use in your personal portfolio.
Remember the club is not your employer, the performers your employer. You have no affiliation with the club, nor the club offering it any renumeration for your images.
This contract was not given to you until you had almost completed your job, even though you've been on the premises since 9 PM.
What would you do?
If you signed the agreement could there be a case for the coercion because the club waited such a long time to request the agreement and stated that if you did not sign it he would never again get club privileges? In addition you know if you don't sign the agreement you won't get paid by your employer, the performer, and so then you will have done a job and will be unable to collect payment First you would need Club permission to photograph during the performance. Their house their rules, if you don't know then ask the club.
Write an agreement with the performer "your client" and come up with the terms.
If the club requires you to meet their "agreement" then you have to go about those terms as well.
Have the client work things out with the club and you just show up and do your job. Give the images to the client, get paid and the client can handle things with the club in regards to image use or whatever.
Photographer
Colored Photos
Posts: 192
Los Angeles, California, US
Exterminate wrote:
Yeh. ditto
Photographer
AgX
Posts: 2851
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US
K E E L I N G wrote:
Since I was hired by the performer I would let it be his call. He's paying me so I've got no reason to use the images, so it's entirely his call.
I consider it his responsibility to have secured permissions from the club, and since he didn't he has the choice of agreeing to their watermark and stipulations or not. No matter his decision, I would demand on getting paid anyway for doing the work in good faith.
Whether the final result has their watermark on it or not is no concern to me, I was simply a hired gun. I initially agreed with this sentiment put forth by several in this thread, but now I’m not as sure. After all, isn’t a reason to hire a professional that she already knows all of the intricacies and details of how to properly get the job done _and_ provide the product or service?
I’m the client when I take my car to the garage for an oil change. I don’t know the legal statutes and the environmental regulations regarding the transport and disposal of the used oil, nor do I care to. I’m willing to pay a professional mechanic not only to change my oil, but to do all of the things necessary to be in compliance with the law. I’m hiring them with the expectation that they already know what to do, that they already have experience in how to get it done, and that they are going to do the legwork to make sure that it’s done properly.
Doesn't the same apply here?
Photographer
TomFRohwer
Posts: 1601
Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Star wrote:
Like many venues this one books single performers months in advance. I would never go behind the performers back and contact the venue No need to do this behind the performers back. And I never said so.
Photography is a business. Part of this business is knowing about the obstacles people who are not in this business do not know.
A bridal couple do not have to know that this cute little chapel isn't a good location for those wedding images they want to get. The wedding photographer must know.
A perfomer do not have to know what obstacles may occur shooting him on stage. Technically, legally, practically. But the photographer has to know. And to tell his customer. And handle this for him and handle this with him.
they could easily see the performer as being high maintenance and I could even cost them their booking. Some time ago I stated here in the forum that the most important asset of a model is being smooth at her/his work.
The same applies to photographers, too.
If you are Peter Lindbergh you may turn the world upside down while shooting. And everyone will be lucky and grateful to help you. If you're not better be smooth.
By the way: photography is a way of communication. Photographers should be able to communicate. In this case it seems to me that communication had failed.
And business means: "I'll do that for you. I'll check that for you. I'll clear this for you."
That's what we are paid for. Photographers, flight attendants, lawyers, surgeons, tax consultants, hotel clerks, ...
Photographer
Rupert Barnes
Posts: 2
Evesham, England, United Kingdom
I was working on a corporate event once and one of the delegates came up to me and said.
"You do not have persission to photograph me, I have signed no document or contract giving you this permission, you must delete all images you have taken containing me"
The delegate was an employee of the company I was working for.
Also if you photograph or video events at Wembley Stadium, in their main function room, or on the pitch, it does not give you permission to shoot outside, the building rights are owned by someone else, and they WILL stop you !
Photographer
studio36uk
Posts: 22898
Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna
Rupert Barnes wrote:
I was working on a corporate event once and one of the delegates came up to me and said.
"You do not have persission to photograph me, I have signed no document or contract giving you this permission, you must delete all images you have taken containing me"
The delegate was an employee of the company I was working for.
Also if you photograph or video events at Wembley Stadium, in their main function room, or on the pitch, it does not give you permission to shoot outside, the building rights are owned by someone else, and they WILL stop you ! BUILDINGS DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS. - - - In the UK - - - the owners of said buildings have only diminished rights where photographs of their buildings are concerned. They can put you off their immediate property but they can not stop you from photographing the building at all... in spite of what the owners seem to believe about the Gherkin [30 St. Mary Axe] and some other venues in London.
CDPA 1988
62 Representation of certain artistic works on public display.
(1)This section applies to—
(a)buildings,
---
(2)The copyright in such a work is not infringed by—
(b)making a photograph or film of it
---
In fact, relatively speaking, you have more rights to shoot outside.
Studio36
|
