Possible Legal Issue - I need some help!

patrickgrem

Ok, so I went to assist a photographer (who just so happened to be my girlfriend at the time) with three weddings in MA. She knew that I wanted to come so that I could use some of the images to boost my portfolio. So I go up there, we have a great time photographing these weddings and then I go home.. but to make a long story short our relationship went south a few weeks after that. it ended horribly. It sucked.

So since everything went so bad with us, to try and get back at me she emailed me to tell me that I could not use any of the images that I TOOK on MY CAMERA and on MY MEMORY cards for portfolio or on my blog.

My question is: Can she even say this with any authority??? I mean it is my work.. and I did NOT sign a contract saying I wouldnt use them nor did we have any type of verbal agreement that I wouldnt use them. All of her clients said it was ok for me to be there. Oh and I wasnt being paid to do assist her if that would make any difference.

ian408

I'd suggest you contact an attorney or the local legal aid society in your area. The advice you get here will be worth what you pay for it.

That said, if you were working for her, the images may well be hers and hers alone. If you were just tagging along and those images were not intended for sale to the B&G, then maybe they're use.

Good luck.

Glort

ian408 wrote: »

I'd suggest you contact an attorney or the local legal aid society in your area. The advice you get here will be worth what you pay for it.

I agree.

That said, What the hell is she going to do if you do use them?
Does she have the money to file a civil suit for images of questionable/ low commercial value?

Don't know what the law is there ( which is why you need to find out from someone qualified) but if it were me I'd blow her a raspberry and use them anyway because here at least, it would cost her $5K before a solicitor would even write a letter to you telling you to stop.

Now watch all the purists light up.

chrisjohnson

This sounds like an affair of the heart and not one for legal opinions. If you want the affair to end you should give the photos back. If you want another chance you should give the photos back.

Be glad you are not engaged in vicious debates about who gets to keep the wide-screen TV.

Enlightphoto

I'm not a lawyer. I just play one in my own mind.

In the US, WFH (Work for Hire) or a transfer of copyright assignment must be made in writing. If you didn't sign it, you didn't do it.

That's just my slightly educated opinion. Consult an IP attorney for a 'legal' answer.

Check out my photo-related legal resources page on my weblog.

patrickgrem

goldenballs wrote: »

This sounds like an affair of the heart and not one for legal opinions. If you want the affair to end you should give the photos back. If you want another chance you should give the photos back.

Be glad you are not engaged in vicious debates about who gets to keep the wide-screen TV.

give what back? they are my images. I let her have what I had taken at these events so that she could give them to the clients. Oh and no I do not want another chance.. this girl is nuts.

And its not like I am trying to hurt her business or stealing clients and Im not trying to sell those images to her clients . I live in Mississippi and she lives in Massachusetts.

patrickgrem

Glort wrote: »

I agree.

That said, What the hell is she going to do if you do use them?
Does she have the money to file a civil suit for images of questionable/ low commercial value?

Don't know what the law is there ( which is why you need to find out from someone qualified) but if it were me I'd blow her a raspberry and use them anyway because here at least, it would cost her $5K before a solicitor would even write a letter to you telling you to stop.

Now watch all the purists light up.

So I called up an attorney that was a friend of mine. He laughed and said "whats she going to do? sue you for a million dollars?" he also said it wouldnt be between me and her (because there was NO contract) but if anything it would be between me and her client BUT since the images aren't damaging to anyone there wouldnt be any reason to sue me. No one would spend the time or money trying to sue me over flattering images wedding images. He said if you do anything just handle it as professionally as possible (which i would do anyway) and also it might be best if I just give this a few months to let it blow over before I use them.

Angelo

patrickgrem wrote: »

So I called up an attorney that was a friend of mine. He laughed and said "whats she going to do? sue you for a million dollars?" he also said it wouldnt be between me and her (because there was NO contract) but if anything it would be between me and her client BUT since the images aren't damaging to anyone there wouldnt be any reason to sue me. No one would spend the time or money trying to sue me over flattering images wedding images. He said if you do anything just handle it as professionally as possible (which i would do anyway) and also it might be best if I just give this a few months to let it blow over before I use them.

sage advice from a knowledgeable friend

good luck

.

Qarik

if there is no contract then there is no contract. use you images as you see fit.

entropysedge

another issue could be possible lack of a model release from the bride and groom ...

ivar

entropysedge wrote: »

another issue could be possible lack of a model release from the bride and groom ...

The OP doesn't seem to want to use them in a way that requires a release, so that shouldn't be a problem.

GerryDavid

I haven't read all this, but this sounds pretty simple. If you have a model release signed by the bride/groom then its good to go, regardless of what the main photog has to say, if you don't have this paper, then you cant use the images. You could go to the bride/groom and ask them to sign it.

Glort

patrickgrem wrote: »

So I called up an attorney that was a friend of mine. He laughed and said "whats she going to do? sue you for a million dollars?" he also said it wouldnt be between me and her (because there was NO contract) but if anything it would be between me and her client BUT since the images aren't damaging to anyone there wouldnt be any reason to sue me. No one would spend the time or money trying to sue me over flattering images wedding images. He said if you do anything just handle it as professionally as possible (which i would do anyway) and also it might be best if I just give this a few months to let it blow over before I use them.

GerryDavid wrote: »

I haven't read all this, but this sounds pretty simple. If you have a model release signed by the bride/groom then its good to go, regardless of what the main photog has to say, if you don't have this paper, then you cant use the images. You could go to the bride/groom and ask them to sign it.

This is why it does pay to read the replies especially when there aren't that many.
The OP has already consulted a legal expert and found that for all practical intents and purposes he CAN use the images.

Some purists may want to make sure they dot every i and cross every t but then there are the people that live in the real world and know that they can get ahead a whole lot better if they arent so pedantic and scared of their own shadow. They do what needs to be done and has a low to non existent risk of problems rather than try and worry themselves about every million to one possibility.

I like to put risk management in terms of my lottery winning theory.
If My chances of winning the lottery were the same, would I be excited?
If the answer is yes, then there is a reasonable danger to the risk and i best avoid it.
If the answer is no, I'm no more likley to win the lottery than what I am now, then the risk is more than acceptable and I'm not going to worry or let that microscopic danger stand in the way of me getting ahead.