On 7/13/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To tell you the truth, if I *WAS* a wedding photographer and I had gotten > paid for my services, and I delivered the photos, negs, or digital image > files to the newlyweds, I wouldn't care less what they did with them after > that. It's their wedding, their photos, their life. >
When I was in that game, that is exactly what I did. I gave em an album of proofs, and the negatives and wished them all the best. The problem is that a lot of photographers want to hold onto residual rights, and specify in their contracts that they are the first owners of copyright. In your country, I believe that the creator of the work is first owner of copyright unless they specifically sign it away by contract. In my country, it is exactly the opposite, wedding photography is considered work for hire, and the person paying for the work is considered first owner unless there is a written agreement to the contrary. What the whole thing means is that photo lab clerks are now expected to be lawyers as well as lab techs, which is a little unfair to both them and their customers, especially since the penalties for transgression can be very onerous. -- William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
