copyright

Artist Resale Rights

If a Canadian photographer sells a print to someone, that person can resell the print any time they want, for any price. The photographer has no say in the matter and does not get any portion of the proceeds. The Canadian Copyright Act currently does not include the right of resale nor a droit de suite. However these rights can be reserved by contract.

Private Member’s Bill C-516 (Artist’s Resale Right Act), a proposed amendment to the Copyright Act, is still before Parliament. It proposes “a right to a [5%] resale royalty on any sale of the work for five hundred dollars or more that is subsequent to the first transfer of ownership by the author.”

The proposed Act would apply to public resales by art dealers, museums, art auction houses and art galleries, but not to private sales between individuals.

Some countries, art dealers and auction houses already recognize an artist’s resale right.

But sadly, unlike other countries’ laws and the USA’s proposed ART Act, Canada’s Bill C-516 excludes photography.

 

Please check the date of this article because it contains information that may become out of date. Tax regulations, sales tax rules, copyright laws and privacy laws can change from time to time. Always check with proper government sources for up-to-date information.

 

Bad Driving

A Montreal photographer last week did an assignment for The Globe and Mail about an Olympic athlete and the car she drives. The athlete lives in Laval, Quebec, and she happens to drive a BMW Mini vehicle.

A Laval BMW Mini dealership saw the story and contacted the photographer to ask permission to use the picture for its Facebook marketing. The luxury car dealer offered the photographer a credit line.

Instead, the photographer asked for a nominal $150.

The car dealership refused and then just took the photo from the newspaper’s web site and reused it without any credit line.
Continue reading →

Business Licence

Earlier today, someone requested a quote for a few pictures to be used on their clothing store’s web site. So I sent a quote for a few pictures to be used on their web site. The person replied that it was “silly” that the quoted price didn’t include all rights, for all the pictures taken, for all eternity.

Photographers are running a business. The purpose of every business is to make money. Photographers make money either by selling pictures or licensing pictures.

Many photographers would be happy to sell all rights to their pictures. But the price would range from thousands of dollars to tens of thousands of dollars and maybe even much higher. Really.
Continue reading →

Invisible Property

For computer-savvy people, “IP” is their computer’s Internet Protocol address. For lawyerly types, IP refers to intellectual property. But to the average person, IP means invisible property – something that’s free for the taking because they think it doesn’t really exist.

Since the year 2000, April 26 has been World Intellectual Property Day. This annual event was created by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to raise awareness of intellectual property and how it can spur creativity and innovation.

Some people think that only silly or greedy photographers care about copyright. But we live in an information age and information is worth money. Ask Google.

Photographers, writers, painters, musicians, songwriters, designers, illustrators, filmmakers, software companies, performers, and any business that creates almost anything, all use copyright to help earn a living.

Privacy, for example, is intangible and invisible yet everyone knows its importance and value. Copyright is also intangible and invisible and it also has importance and value.

Copyright and other forms of intellectual property are a valuable business asset. There’s no reason why a photographer or any other business or individual should give it away for free.

Without copyright ownership, photographs have only sentimental value.

– author unknown

 

Changes to Canadian copyright law

A few days ago, Bill C-11, the Copyright Modernization Actreceived Royal Assent. This means that Canadian photographers will be treated the same as all other Canadian creators and they will finally have similar rights to photographers in most other countries.

The new Act is not yet officially in force [update: much of the new Act became law on November 7], but for photographers, here’s a quick look at some of the changes to the Copyright Act.

 

• Section 10 has been repealed. This section used to say that the person who owned the film or memory card was the Author of the pictures. Now, the photographer is the automatic Author. Only the Author has Moral Rights.
Continue reading →

Air Ball

Last year, Ranaan Katz, a minority co-owner of the NBA’s current championship team the Miami Heat filed a lawsuit against a blogger who was critical of Katz’ commercial real estate business.

Two weeks ago, Katz filed a copyright infringement suit against the same blogger for publishing an unflattering picture of him. The photo was apparently taken while Katz was standing courtside at a Miami Heat game. He’s also suing Google for refusing to remove the photo from the Web.

Katz is claiming that he owns the copyright to the picture without any further proof.
Continue reading →

Corporate photography policy

Most companies use photography on their web sites, social media sites, corporate blogs, printed brochures and marketing materials, in-house publications, trade show displays and probably in several other ways. As such, it’s very important that companies have a policy regarding the handling and storage of these photographs.

• By law, almost every picture is copyrighted. Permission to reproduce such photos needs to be in writing. Does a business have written permission for every picture it uses? Where are these written permissions kept?

• Professional photography is licensed for use and rarely, if ever, sold outright. Where does a company keep copies of these licenses and how are they tracked?

Continue reading →

css.php