So true

You’re very welcome Mary. I’m glad it helped 🙂

yeah, I feel you...get a lawyer on it... see how things quickly move along in your favor...best of luck..

I'd suggest using some kind of CRM or accounting software. At the very least, set reminders on your phone if/when certain licenses will expire. Honestly though, most of the licenses I write are in perpetuity so I don't have to worry a whole lot about tracking expirations.

I think a lot of this depends on the terms and conditions between you and the original client who hired you.

@@MatthewAPhoto thank you for your feedback.

I put most of what I say in the video in this article on APAlmanac. That may help. apalmanac.com/business/photo-licensing-101-the-basics-explained-176320

@@MatthewAPhoto This is perfect! Thanks so much!

That's like asking "how long is a piece of string?" A lot of variables to consider when licensing. Mike Kelley and I created a video about licensing specifically. apalmanac.com/product/licensing-your-photography-the-business-of-architecture-photography

Matt H wrote, “When you say protected your images against copyright infringement what do you mean?” To best legally protect your photographs against copyright infringers, you should “timely” (IMMEDIATELY) register your images with the US Copyright Office (USCO). Photographs not timely registered are typically NOT enforceable for money damages. To have a timely copyright registration, register your photographs either BEFORE the infringements begin or registered WITHIN three-month of their first-publication date (the day you list, license, sell, share/distribute, or deliver your images to clients or stock). You also help “presumptively” PROVE your photo copyright creation & copyright ownership claims by quickly registering your photographs with the USCO. It’s not necessarily your RAW or original files that proves your copyright authorship, but rather your issued US copyright “Certificate of Registration” - it will include the official US government date stamp of your registered photo copyright claim. Watch the first 20-seconds of Joshua Kaufman, a Washington, DC copyright attorney litigator, summarize copyright registration; Joshua also addresses the economics of NOT timely registering your works: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mah_fs6j0cu9Y40.html Matt H wrote, “I did some shots of a product they wanted me to post on my social media. I did that then they asked for the images and I said they could post them on their Instagram account but nothing else. I took a look at their website the other day and they used them on there which I didn’t think they could do? Any thoughts? I feel like I need some standard terms and conditions of usage drafted or something?” ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS secure your photography assignments and stock licenses with a signed/dated agreement. If they won’t sign your agreement for whatever reason, walk away! Your agreement needs to address who are the clients; what type of photography you’re doing; how long will the client get to use/exploit your photographs; that you solely and exclusively own the photo copyrights (not them!); list your photo or licensing fee, and note when you’ll get paid; try and get them to list your copyright attribution with your URL and/or social media handle; and other things. Many copyright attorneys sell contract/assignment templates (a good investment). Send me a reply for some of those links. If you only had a verbal agreement, you may have limited recourse. You could first contact the client and explain your concerns. If you’re not satisfied with their response, you could visit with a copyright attorney to get legal advice on how to proceed, if at all. Send me a reply if you need copyright attorney links. *SUMMARY: If you’re a photographer who enjoys having headaches and problems in life, don’t get things in writing and skip registering (protecting) your photo copyrights with the USCO!*

Go for it! 👍

If a company/business has an in-house employed photographer, typically it’s the company that owns the copyright.

@@MatthewAPhoto thank you :-)

Many (but clearly not all) contests are a vehicle for businesses and organizations to snatch up free image rights and content. The fine print and wording of some of these contests are pretty egregious in what they're asking for under the guise of "exposure" for designers, builders, etc. That's why some photographers don't automatically include use for contests in their boilerplate license. They're not completely against the idea of their images being used in contests...they would just prefer to review each one on a case by cases basis. As far as your initial question/scenario goes...the photographer doesn't have rights to a design. They have ownership and rights to their intellectual property. In this case, a photo or set of photos. While a photographer may have the legal RIGHT to license images out to additional parties, some of it does come down to ethics. Personally, I've never licensed a single image to a stock photo site simply for making a few bucks. Outside of the commissioning client, any other parties who've licensed images were involved with that project one way or another. And typically, conversations about this are discussed with clients up front so there are no surprises. Clear and open communications seems to diffuse a lot of issues 😉(and yes that burden lands more on the shoulders of the photographer) Music can sometimes be a comparison that helps to understand things a little better. If a person creates a song where the lyrics describe a living room you've designed in great detail, the songwriter is still the copyright owner of that song. Copyright and licensing standards between music and photos are very similar.

@@MatthewAPhoto I guess my suggestion as it pertains to the license, is that the photographer contract needs to protect the designer as well, and photographers also need to provide credit when posting as well as request permission to sell photos of their client's work. As the musician who commented previously stated, the musician goes in for a recording, but the studio doesn't get rights to their recording - the recording is done and the musician or their label have the rights. I have run into challenges with the photographer taking three months to reply to publishers who want to publish our work. We need to have just as much of a license and protection as the photographer. I do not ever want to be on the hook for a non-responsive photographer when I'm requesting licensure to publish, as I have been. So, I think contracts need to have certain requirements, such as the photographer needs to provide photos within x timeline, and no response from the photographer after x days when requesting publication permissions automatically grants permission. I imagine you are very ethical and very considerate, but not all photographers are, which is why awesome photographers like you could take advantage of this and set a precedent in these agreements. It's not like we can go photograph again - we're intruding on someone's home and putting a lot of time and money into making sure it's perfect. So, we need to be careful to protect the designer's interests just as strongly as the well-deserved photographer's. It's so rough on us sometimes, that many designers end up getting photography training, and we really want to love and trust our photographers!

@@robertdimartino5794 wrote, “Why do you need to file a copyright for every image. I thought once you take the image it is automatically your intellectual property. No other steps necessary.” US copyright law grants authors/creatives an immediate & automatic copyright upon creating a work of authorship or taking a selfie and other types of photographs. Unfortunately, automatic copyright protection is, too often, legally WORTHLESS and not really enforceable for money damages. To have the right (“legal standing”) to sue copyright infringers in federal court (notwithstanding the small-claims-copyright court/tribunal - Copyright Claims Board; see www.CCB.gov), you MUST register your photograph/s with the US Copyright Office (USCO). The US copyright registration system is very much a vetting process to help *“authenticate”* your photo copyright validity. The last time I checked, about 5% of all works submitted for copyright registration were not copyrightable and rejected by the USCO. It’s NOT necessarily about having a RAW or original file in possession that proves your copyright creation, but rather it’s your issued copyright *“Certificate of Registration”* that the US Copyright Office will mail you. Your Certificate (or the USCO’s refusal letter to register your photographs) is what a federal judge MUST see for you to have legal standing to bring an infringement case into federal court. By quickly registering your photographs, either as an unpublished work or registered within five-years of first-publication, you’re STATUTORILY granted *“presumptive legal proof”* of your copyright claim (see 17 USC § 410(c)). Your Certificate will include your “effective date of registration,” the official US government date stamp of your registered photo copyright claim. When someone challenges my copyright creation, I show them my Certificate’s registration number (not my RAW files), and that usually shuts them up. If you’re able to register your photographs even MORE QUICKLY, you get additional legal protection/enforcement: If your photograph/s was *“timely”* registered (registered BEFORE the infringement began or WITHIN three-month of its first-publication date), you attorney will have the necessary LEVERAGE to push non-Fair Use copyright infringers to settle out of court; otherwise, (post-trial) they are liable for statutory damages from $750 to $30,000 and up to $150,000 for willful copyright infringement AND your attorney fees AND legal costs (at the court’s discretion). See 17 USC § 504 (Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits) & 17 USC § 505 (Remedies for infringement: Costs and attorney’s fees). If you miss either of these two very time-sensitive windows to register, you can ONLY pursue *“actual damages,”* typically the missed licensing fee you would have charged and/or the number of copies the infringer made (these are usually LOW fees), and the “disgorgement of profits” the infringer made (IF ANY!) from reproducing your work. Importantly, you’re responsible for your attorney fees and other legal costs! *So, unless you’re a millionaire or your actual damages + the infringer’s unlawful profits are SUBSTANTIAL, the costs to litigate post-trial and/or negotiate an out of court settlement will NOT likely cover your attorney fees, making it un-economical to pursue US-based copyright infringers without securing a timely registered copyright claim.* According to an American Intellectual Property Law Association report (2019 Report of the Economic Survey, at I-208, 2019, www.aipla.org/detail/journal-issue/2019-report-of-the-economic-survey -- pay wall???), the average cost to litigate a copyright infringement dispute is $397,000. I believe the 2022 number is over $500K. To mitigate their financial exposure & legal liability (including receiving bad media press and/or social media negative commentary), most all US-based, non-judgement-proof copyright infringers who are facing a timely registered copyright claim and whose use does not fall within the scope of Fair Use will want to confidentially settle out of court and put their infringing actions behind them. In fact, something like 98% or more of all US copyright infringement disputes settle out of court. Because the cost to litigate can be EXORBITANT, it’s rare to see a US copyright action be adjudicated through trial. If you contact a US copyright litigator to pursue money damages against an infringer, his/her first, second, or third question to you will be: “Robert, did you ‘timely’ register your photograph/s with the USCO?” I hope you answer, “yes!” Still don’t believe me about timely registering your copyrights? Then watch the first 20-seconds of Joshua Kaufman, a Washington, DC copyright attorney litigator, summarize copyright registration; Joshua also addresses the economics of NOT timely registering your works: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mah_fs6j0cu9Y40.html If you choose not to (timely) register your photographs, you should, at the very least, affix them with watermark/s, logos, metadata, copyright attributions, licensing information, and/or other *“Copyright Management Information”* (CMI). Non-Fair-Use copyright infringers who knowingly remove, change, or cover up CMI to hide their copyright infringing actions OR encourage others to infringe can be liable for your actual damages & lost profits OR statutory damages from $2,500 to $25,000 PLUS your attorney fees & costs (at the court’s discretion). Intentionally removing/changing CMI can suggest “willful” copyright infringement, and if the work was timely registered, infringers can now be liable for $150,000 in statutory damages. Good news: An infringed work does NOT need to be timely registered to pursue CMI violators. See www.photolaw.net/did-someone-remove-the-copyright-notice-from-your-photograph.html