Quote:
Originally posted by CamChicks
Sorry it is really not "shared" by default. Unless under contract, the person who creates a work is the owner of the copyright. Photographers are no different from writers or musicians under this law. We have models sign releases to strengthen our position, prove there was no other agreement, and protect against side-claims such as distress caused by the use of those images, etc. But all those photographers who shot the Tara Reid boob-slip are free to sell those pictures and transfer copyright to whomever they wish without her permission and without compensating her.
Of course, none of this will stop you from being sued, and every individual case may be open to interpretation by a judge or jury based on the details.
|
You both are confused.
By law, absent of any work for hire agreement or other contractual arrangement, the photographer is the copyright holder of any images that they produce. There is NO shared ownership.
However, that does not give the photographer the right to do whatever they want with the pictures. Without a signed release, the photographer cannot publish the images or use them in any commercial endeavor.
You get the models to sign a release NOT to prove there was no other agreement, but rather to RELEASE their likeness to the copyright holder for the purpose spelled out in the release. Ownership of ones likeness is a right protected by law. Your likeness is what you look like AND/OR any identifying marks, such as tattoos, scars, etc.
The Tara Reid situation is an exception covered by the doctrine of fair use. She is a public figure whose exposure of her bare breast is a newsworthy event. In addition, I believe she actually does give consent by nature of the photography area at the party she was attending.
Hope that clears it up.