Ownership of content
 

I got a question about ownership/content for those in the know.

On a site like Voyeurweb, where amateurs submit pictures of themselves, who owns the copyright to the submitted pictures? The webmaster, the amateur, the photography?

Is the webmaster free to use that content however he please? Use it in ads? Even sell it as content to other webmasters or viewers? Or does the amateur have to sign a disclaimer agreeing to that?

For example, you start up a site like Voyeurweb and when a girl signs up to post her pics, she agrees to the terms and conditions which state by submitting pics to your site, you're free to do whatever you want with them (ie resell them). Then you re-sell these pics to webmasters as new amateur content. Is this legal? Can she sue you despite having electronically agreed to the terms and conditions? If not, what if the terms and conditions were outlined in a contract which had to be signed and mailed/faxed back?

Once again, someone asks us. We don't know. Whoever took the original photo starts out with the rights, but they can give them away if they want. So, it all depends upon what Voyeurweb wants photo donors to give up.

I understand that part... what I want to know is this: are the terms and conditions legally binding if someone agrees to them by electronically checking the "I agree" box.

Say I ran a site like Voyeurweb. A total babe signs up and agrees to my terms and conditions which says she agrees to allow me to use her submissions any way I see fit and I don't owe her any cut of profits made.
She submits several videos of her masturbating, I compile a video cd and sell it online and make kajillions of dollars. Can she sue me or somehow demand a cut of my 6.7 kajillion dollars?

Electronic signatures in this case are not sure proof of ownership to the rights of a photo either. So it's a toss of the dice. :Graucho

So if this total babe prints up my terms and conditions, signs 'em, and mails/faxes me proof that she is over 18, am I'm free to use her pictures/videos in any which way I choose?

ONLY if you can prove SHE owns the copyright/rights and IS the person faxing or mailing the agreement when you get down to it.

*I* have pics of my ex husband and could easily do what you are asking. Does that make me him?! :Graucho

well, if she took the pic with her digital camera, there isn't a way to prove ownership, is there?
and if she submits a signed document attesting to the fact she is who she says she is and provides me with corroborating legal id, what more can i really do to prove she is who she says she is?

Have the signature witnessed on her end by a notiary. That takes care of proving who she is.

I think on the sites that you are mentioning the website is actually the one that has the internet rights to distribution of the content.. as for the actual image it is the property of the subject until he/she signs the rights of his/her image over to another company for the use to make money off of. Without a model the release any other person distributing or using the pic without the consent of the subject is then open and liable for damages and money made off of the sales of the pic..

that is my understanding on the law

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think on the sites that you are mentioning the website is actually the one that has the internet rights to distribution of the content.. as for the actual image it is the property of the subject until he/she signs the rights of his/her image over to another company for the use to make money off of. Without a model the release any other person distributing or using the pic without the consent of the subject is then open and liable for damages and money made off of the sales of the pic..
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not sure what law you are talking about. And, in point of fact, there are two issues here, one is copyright the other is right to use image. Unless there is a specific use for hire agreement in place, the person who clicked the shutter on the camera owns the copyright.

However, for commercial purposes, such as making money on a website, the actual model or person photographed retains the right to his or her image, unless there is a model release signed.

There are other complications, such as where the photo was takes; public or private property, things like that.

But, it is very important to understand that in the vast majority of cases, the photographer owns the copyright to her or her work.

The simple way to look at it is this, if you did not snap the photo yourself, you need a signed contract from the person who took the photo and the person in the photo (which would be a model release in most cases) to use the photo for commercial purposes. If you did snap the photo, you need the release of the subject to use the photo commercially.

And, by the way, just because a photo has been published to the Internet does not mean it is in some sort of public domain. Someone snapped the photo and that person is usually who owns the rights to it. That does not mean commercial rights, but the copyright rights.

Again, this is US-centric...but the Millenium Copyright Act applies, and many nations have signed onto that.

Brutal

:thumbsup to Brutal, good explanation.

As my lawyer put it to me a while ago, "The only way to transfer ownership or put a photo into the public domain is IN WRITING."

To my knowledge, and because of the ease with which electronic documents can be forged and/or tampered with, only an ink on paper signature is truly binding.

yeah i dont think saying "but he clicked the check box saying he agreed" will hold up in court very good.

now what about the right to use pictures? a girl emails me her picture with a note saying "you can use this picture of me on your site". i put it on my site and make $100 of it. can she legally come after me for any of that?

Okay, again, there are two issues here.

1. The copyright of the photo. (photographer owns)
2. The commercial rights to an image. (model retains)

If you take the photo, you own the copyright to that photo in almost all cases. However, the person in the photo, if he or she is identifiable, retains the rights to their image for commercial purposes, unless there is a signed agreement.

That means, if you are a wedding photographer, the wedding couple buy the photo from you. They can't then take it to some copy place and (legally) make copies of it. You own the copyright. That means it cannot be copied without your permission.

BUT, barring a model release from the happy couple, you can't sell that photo to someone else OR even use it for commercial advertising.

So, to put this to bed, in most commercial endeavours, both the photographer and the model must agree to the commecial uses of a photo image.

Does that answer it?

__________________________________________________ _
now what about the right to use pictures? a girl emails me her picture with a note saying "you can use this picture of me on your site". i put it on my site and make $100 of it. can she legally come after me for any of that?
__________________________________________________ _

Actually, the more important question would be, who owns the photo. You might be able to get away with a digital signature in you kept the E-mail headers. But, you know, someone shot that photo and the girl may not own the copyright. And THAT would really be the bigger issue. I mean, she may be freely giving away her rights to the image, but she sure doesn't have the power to give away the copyright...and you would have NO defense for that.

Brutal

thanks a lot BrutalMaster!