MJL Imaging

I've been doing this for a couple years now, and have always wondered where I might find literature pertaining to my legal rights to the renderings that I do for other firms/companies. Any help would be much appreciated.

Ernest Burden

-search findlaw.com for US Title 17 Copyright Law
-read the Graphic Artist's Guild Guide to Pricing and Ethical Practices
-join the New York Society of Renderers and get to know other members, ask questions
-ask a more specific question here

But in general--you own the copyright to any work you create as a byproduct of its creation. You retain that right even as you sell usage rights and/or an original piece to a client. UNLESS you have a written statement that you are selling them your copyright. One other note--copyright begins when an artwork is brought into tangible media. So exposed film in your camera is NOT copyrighted, developed negatives ARE. With a digital image, there is an arguement that they are not in tangible form so long as they exist only on a hard-drive. It would be good practice to print works as you create them to be sure.

__________________
Ernest Burden III
AcmeDigital
architectural rendering

ch83575

This is not how I was taught. As a photographer the ASMP (american society of media photographers) always told me that the moment you press the cable release and expose your film, you own the copyright. I have never actualy read the laws, but have read this in multiple places concerning photography.

As for your sugestion about printing out your work, I would second that whole hartedly, and even take it a step further. Register your copyrights! It is actually not very expensive to register your copyrights with the government and it can be done in batches for a single fee. For instance you could register all of your work for one quarter or even for one year. The benifit of this is not that you get any more rights over your work, but that your rights are easier to prove in court. For instance; if you sell an architect an image for usage in their website or portfolio (and you have made clear that you are only selling the rights for that usage) then if that architect gives your image to a magazine without paying another usage fee you can easily collect from the publication if your copyright is registered (most major publications will actualy pony up just about anything you ask for once they realize they have printed your copyrighted work without permition), if the copyright is not registered they can drag you to court just to prove that you own the copyright.

Its good to see this discussion, after all what are we really selling?

-Chad

Ernest Burden

It's right there at the front--

US Code, Title 17 Chapter 1 subsection 101 'definitions':

"A work is ''fixed'' in a tangible medium of expression when its
embodiment in a copy or phonorecord, by or under the authority of
the author, is sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to
be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for a period
of more than transitory duration...."


By that definition you can see that exposed film is NOT copyrighted, but negatives are. The work need to be in a tangible medium.



Have you tried that, or just heard it said? I have wrestled with both architects and magazines over copyrights and from experience I can report the following:

Architects are largely ignorant to intelectual property rights. They will do what they like. You telling them different simply proves to them what a difficult jerk you are. Sure, you can take 'em to court. You may even win. But prove damages from what most people see as 'free advertizing'. And cross that client off the 'how will I feed my kids this month' list.

Next comes the press. I have approached various publications about their un-authorized and un-attributed use of copyrighted renderings. Their responses are always along the lines of 'we got that image from XYZ Architects, go talk to them if you don't like it'. Some simply say they have an un-impeachable right to use ANYTHING they want anytime they want it because they are the press, citing the 'fair use' section of USC17. Never mind that they likely are NOT covered by it, but again--take 'em to court. I have that position in writing from The New York Times legal department from when I complaigned about them using my work without permission or credit. Actually, knowing that a letter would be ignored, I sent them an invoice for $1,000 for the 2 times they ran my rendering. Take 'em to court. The National Writer's Guild DID, and won, but it took going all the way through court after court to the United States Supreme Court. That is not a cheap legal battle.

A more interesting approach is used by one of my collegues in NY. His contract has a clause that fines the client $500 for each time his work is printed in the press without his name credited. He gets credited more now.

__________________
Ernest Burden III
AcmeDigital
architectural rendering

Damocles

Excellent !
I will add that one... in my futur contracts. I always like knowing in advance what will be the relationship between me and my client. If they are well intentionned they won't be irritated by that. At least they will think that you care about your work. That's good too !

Cheers.

Daniel Labrecque

__________________
Dans la vie comme au hockey... c'est pas celui qui a les plus beaux patins qui score le plus.

MJL Imaging

Thank you for the response to my question. Specifically, thank you Ernest Burden for the link