Employed or not employed

[Longshots]

Just to clarify something. If you're commissioning a photographer for commercial purposes, then you are unlikely to be employing them, and therefore the point suggested in a (now closed) topic, is that you do not automatically "get" the copyright.

If anyone wants to to know the facts, the Australian Copyright Council, put on many information seminars around the country, and the correct information, can be sourced from www.copyright.org.au/ Which btw is a nice new site.

[ricktas]

Thanks William. I am happy for this discussion to continue here, which is a different subject to what the OP asked in the thread that I closed, which got off-track from the original question asked.

[Kym]

Exactly! If you are employed, your employer owns the ©.
If its a commission the you do unless its contracted otherwise.

[JM Tran]

thank you William for making that fact more public and accessible

[maccaroneski]

Well worth pointing out, as well as the "flipside". If you are employed, as Kym pointed out in the earlier thread, then in the absence of a specific term in your employment contract, the default situation is that copyright in any intellectual property that you create or photos you take vests in the employer (i.e. not you).

[Longshots]

And my reason for higlighting this was that the situation in my world is that 95% of the shooters, and I speak to, here from, advise etc, are self-employed, and the client is Commissioning, not employing.

Its that part that makes an important difference in understanding the copyright situation. So unless you are doing all of the other things that relate to employing - job security, holiday and sick pay etc etc, you are unlikely to expect to own the copyright.

So Kym and I may have been talking at cross purposes, with the same understanding of the copyright position in Australia, the original topic was about a query, that did not involve a photographer being employed - which is a huge difference of understanding.

Commission a photographer in the commercial area for commercial reasons, and unless you are Crown, the "default" situation is that the photographer owns the copyright.

And as a small point, as I said earlier in that other topic, clients tend to go with the little information that they know on this topic. So if you have a an hours worth of photography, or three decades of pro photography under your belt, you're not only letting yourself down by relying on the wrong or incorrect information, you are indeed letting everyone else down at the same time. So spend less time than it takes to read this topic with just a few replies, and go and read the information by the Australian Copyright Council. And the next time before you consider debating on an online forum the question of wether you should give your rights away, take the time to ask your client why they're asking for copyright. Most of the time, their needs can be met by some education as to what a licence is, why it gives them everything they want, and why demanding copyright simply isnt the best course for direction.

Understand that the power to succeed, is in the management of your own intellectual property. Give that away, and you wont be as happy as Apple, Microsoft,(to use just two examples of software companies), and so many of the other companies, and individuals who do very very well thank you, but LICENCE their products, and dont give away their copyright.

I've included my copyright on several occasions. Some it was worth it, and I wouldnt have use the images in my portfolio, and other times (for instance shooting some very well known rock musicians/bands etc) I've regretted it immensely as I have nothing to show to recall those experiences.

[ricktas]

Good topic, and even though others may feel differently. I believe in society at present, if you enter into an agreement of any type, it should be done in writing to ensure all parties are fully aware of the conditions of the employment or contract. Failure to have something in place is behind a lot of disputes and court cases. Everyone should protect their interests by ensuring that any agreed terms are in writing.

[Longshots]

Good topic, and even though others may feel differently. I believe in society at present, if you enter into an agreement of any type, it should be done in writing to ensure all parties are fully aware of the conditions of the employment or contract. Failure to have something in place is behind a lot of disputes and court cases. Everyone should protect their interests by ensuring that any agreed terms are in writing.

Worth repeating - over and over and over again !!