It was 14/10/03 12:05 pm, when Steve Bradshaw wrote:
> Also meant to add:
>
> who purchased the film? Again if the other photgrapher was working as a
> freelance to Nathan and used film purchased by Nathan, then Nathan owns the
> negs.
Steve
I've never understood the logic of that. A long, long time ago a
director/producer tried that on me and I gave him the negs only because it
was a low budget shoot and he was desperate for publicity shots, which I
alone had taken on most of the days but just for interest.
I would love to contest such an assertion in court. A roll of neg or a CF
card a photograph do not make. It's the photographer's talent that makes a
photograph. It's his brain, mind, eyes, legs, arms, hands and the years of
practice and study that make the photograph.
If you took the above assertion to it's logical conclusion, you could say
the lab that developed the film also own the rights since they used their
chemicals to develop it.
If someone contests that they own the copyright because they paid for the
neg, I would go out and buy a roll of film and include a note that gives
them total copyright of the contents and send it to them via recorded
delivery. See how far it gets them...
If you are an employee with all the benefits that go with it, like hols,
sick leave, a salary, pension, etc, and you use the employer's camera
equipment, his stock and shoot in his time, then of course he owns the
copyright.
--/ Shangara Singh.
:: Photoshop Glossary of Terms, Phrases & Acronyms
:: Photoshop 7.0 Essential Tips
:: http://www.photoshopace.com
:: Exam Aids for Photoshop, Illustrator & Dreamweaver
:: http://www.examaids.com
===============================================================
GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
