What to do? Someone else gave permission to use his photos

kd2

A husband of a friend is a military helicopter pilot. While on a mission, he took pics of flares shooting out of his helicopter.

A friend of theirs (wife of another guy on the helicopter) excitedly announced that a military helicopter manufacturing company contacted her for permission to use the pics in brochures, flyers, etc. The friend gave her permission. (I think she had posted the pics on Facebook and that's how this helicopter company found out about the pics and contacted her.)

Now the guy who actually took the pics just found out all of this.

Should he contact the helicopter company and tell them he is the person who took the pics? And what should he do from there? Since he was on duty, does the Army own the pics? Can the manufacturing company use those pics without any type of signed agreement (from him or the Army)?

Any suggestions for my friend? Any info at all is helpful. It's not that my friend is looking for monetary compensation. Maybe he should be, but it's just the fact that someone else gave permission for his photos to be used and now he is asking what to do, if anything.

Cygnus Studios

A very complicated situation. There are way too many possibilities. The D.O.D. may have an opinion/rule on this, and that will trump any person's claim. The person who took the picture should clear the use through them first.

JDrake

I could be wrong but I believe that if the guy who actually TOOK the photos was on the job working for the military when he took the pictures... then the pictures actually belong to the US gov. and are therefor in the public domain. Credit would still go to him for taking the pics but since he was "on the job" at the time they were taken, anyone can use them.

Again.... I could be wrong about this.... but this is what I remember reading about the military and photographs taken and public domain etc.

Angelo

A) only the photographer can give permissive use rights. He should put the helicopter company on notice they are in violation of copyright with a cease and desist order.

The helicopter company could press fraud charges and the photographer could press theft charges against the "friend"

C) If the photographer was not employed as such by the Army it's unlikely the Army has a claim to the images. A "work-for-hire" would imply the photographer was hired by the Army specifically and exclusively for that purpose.

Cygnus Studios

Keep in mind the military has a funny way of deciding what is and what is not acceptable for their members. I know that they are much looser than when I served 20 years ago, but they still have funny rules and they change on a whim.

There are just too many possibilities given the limited information in the original post.

Things like public domain do not always apply to the military. Even if the photographer is not taking images for the Army, they can invoke claims to the images based on what they determine their military value to be.

The powers that be in the military have a very broad view of what they deem to be available to the public. The rules out in the real world can be quite different than those in the military.

Blaker

Angelo wrote:

A)

C) If the photographer was not employed as such by the Army it's unlikely the Army has a claim to the images. A "work-for-hire" would imply the photographer was hired by the Army specifically and exclusively for that purpose.

The OP said the military helicopter pilot/photographer was on a mission when he took the photos.

First thing he should do is check with his commanding officer ( or whatever office is appropriate) to find out if he even owns the copyright to the photos he took. Military goes by different rules than the rest of us.

kd2

Interestingly, the speaker at a business luncheon today was an attorney who specializes in intellectual property. I asked her about this, and I think the term she used was "transferred rights". (I could be mistaken, I didn't take notes.) But in a nutshell, because the guy is in the military, he probably signed paperwork when he joined saying anything he produces while on duty is rightfully owned by the military. So the military should be the one taking up the issue with the helicopter company.

Blaker

kd2 wrote:

Interestingly, the speaker at a business luncheon today was an attorney who specializes in intellectual property. I asked her about this, and I think the term she used was "transferred rights". (I could be mistaken, I didn't take notes.) But in a nutshell, because the guy is in the military, he probably signed paperwork when he joined saying anything he produces while on duty is rightfully owned by the military. So the military should be the one taking up the issue with the helicopter company.

Yup, I am sure the military owns the rights to those photos- but the company using them didn't 'steal' them, they received permission from the person they thought was the rightful copyright owner.
The friend who gave permission for the photos to be used should contact the company and tell them that the photos were not hers, and that they therefore do not have the legal right to use the photos.
Once she explains to them that the military owns the copyright, I am sure they will cease distribution of the brochures.

johng

My advice is that the photographer make some calls. The 'friend' may be too embarassed to call the company. The LAST thing the photographer needs is to have the shots published, and the photographer catch flack for giving away images taken while on duty that may be property of the military. Once the publication is on notice then the photog can go up through his chain of command to see how to properly get the photos published (if he, in fact, wishes that to happen). But, first thing's first - CYA - don't expect the 'friend' to follow-thru.

Angelo

Blaker wrote:

...Military goes by different rules than the rest of us.

Yes, that's quite possible but not against law and government agencies do not (can not?) copyright works, as best I can tell from the information on the copyright office site.