Image copyright

[cliveh]

Would you ever sell the image copyright to your picture/s?

 

[480sparky]

For the right price, heck yes. But it would depend on the image as well.


Actually, I don't think you can outright sell the copyright itself. My understanding (of US copyright law) is that will always stay with you. But you can always sell all the reproduction rights that are protected by the copyright laws, and as part of that agreement, that you will not offer for sale your own copies of the image.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

You can sell the actual copyright to an image. I would not do so.

 

[OptiKen]

As the old saying goes, "everything has a price".

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes, you can sell the copyright to a photograph, but I would not do it.

 

[Alan Klein]

Sure. Why not? Artists sell their sculptures, paintings, etc. What so different about photography? Ok you can make copies. But let's say you burned the negative after making one print. Just like a sculpture, there's only one.

 

[bdial]

I'd love to be in the position where someone wanted to buy the copyright of one of my photos, but selling all rights to the pic wouldn't be my first choice.

 

[jacaquarie]

Yes!!

Which of my photographs do you want?
Start the bidding.

We are all prostitutes, it is a mater of what do you want me to do and how much will you pay me to do it?

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

It all depends on your image. Sometimes it's better to license the image on an as needed basis. The need being the length of usage, media and geographical location. When you license it, you still own it. If it's a complete buyout, you don't get any more usage fees. Come prefer a buyout to protect themselves from future licensing fees and to prevent a competitor from buying the image.

 

[480sparky]

............If it's a complete buyout, you don't get any more usage fees. Come prefer a buyout to protect themselves from future licensing fees and to prevent a competitor from buying the image.

If you're in the business of selling images, this should always be an option. If you figure you'll earn, say, $1000 on a particular image by the time you ........um, ..................err, ................. 'run out of film' or 'exhaust your fixer' as it were, and someone is willing to pony up $2,000 for all future rights, you'd be nuts not to ink that deal.

For the right amount of money, I'd sign over all current and future licensing rights to many of my images. $1000 today beats 'maybe something, ....... sometime.' It's just good business sense.

 

[removed-user-1]

I've only had this come up once, for an album cover. I offered to sell all rights, for a substantial amount of money. Then I asked the musician why he wanted all rights. His answer was that he did not want anyone else to use the picture. We worked out a compromise where I agreed not to license the photograph to any other musical artist (or in conjunction with any third-party work that could be construed as related to music, such as a poster), but I retained my copyright otherwise.

The album was a dud.

 

[SuzanneR]

For the right price, heck yes. But it would depend on the image as well.


Actually, I don't think you can outright sell the copyright itself. My understanding (of US copyright law) is that will always stay with you. But you can always sell all the reproduction rights that are protected by the copyright laws, and as part of that agreement, that you will not offer for sale your own copies of the image.

If that were the case, then it really wouldn't be worth anything. Yes, you can sell your copyright, but it should be for the right (very high) price.

 

[Xmas]

If that were the case, then it really wouldn't be worth anything. Yes, you can sell your copyright, but it should be for the right (very high) price.

Haggle over reproduction rights

https://www.writersandartists.co.uk...sential-information/copyright-law-for-artists

 

[removed account4]

yes, and i have

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

It's been a while, but are asmp and apa usage charts still available? You can get an idea of usage fees to determine a buyout.

 

[Xmas]

It can get messy

http://media.gn.apc.org/fl/1206afp.html

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Depends on price and how much I'm in love with the image.

 

[benjiboy]

I'd love to be in the position where someone wanted to buy the copyright of one of my photos, but selling all rights to the pic wouldn't be my first choice.

Me too, I've been a fairly successful amateur photographer for more than sixty years and nobody ever wanted to buy the copyright of any of my work.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

No. No. No.

Depends on price and how much I'm in love with the image.

It's how much the client loves the image They're paying.

 

[MattKing]

It depends on what I might want to do with it in the future.

 

[RobC]

How many of you ever sell any images anyway?

if you are using your smarts, then you license your images for set usage and the client has to specify the usage and circulation of any publication they intend to put it in you price accordingly.
If the client says they will only purchase it if you sell them the copyright, tell them to shove it up their *****

Then you will find out how much they really want to use it and you can up the price accordingly.

 

[R.Gould]

Simple answer, never again, I did so once, I was younger than I am now and a bit more naive than I am now, the person who bought the copyright made 3 times as much as he paid me, I would sell the rights to an image for a particuler purpose, but keep the copyright always

 

[blansky]

Interestingly in studio portrait photography, as I wrote on another thread, the practice of photographers giving/selling their files to their customers has become commonplace now.

This enables the customer to get prints made, use them for social media etc, but not sure of the legal aspect on if there were some off chance the customer could make money on them by selling them.

 

[eddie]

I've only been asked to sell my copyright twice. Once was to a news organization, for use on their website. I didn't sell the copyright, but did lease the image for 12 months with limitations. It could only be used for the single purpose, and they had to visibly show my copyright with the image. The other was a publishing company which wanted to use a few of my images. The offer was good money, and I had no problem with them making posters, but I didn't want them to do t-shirts, calendars, coasters, etc, which they refused to remove from the contract. They also wouldn't agree to renegotiation if there was to be a second edition printed. I turned them down.
However, if someone wants to offer me Lik-like money, I'm all ears...

 

[Xmas]

Hi Blanksy

That would be reproduction and illegal if you provided then with a suitable reproduction caveat.
Watermarks are good like large reproduction or copying verboten.