Am I allowed to use this photo

Status
Not open for further replies.

mayaone

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
189
Reaction score
8
Hello all,
I have a photo of a Olympic gymnist. I am in that photo too. I bought it at a meet where she was posing with anyone for a price. The title of the chapter has her name in it but it isn't really about her and nothing is said negatively about her but do I have rights to that photo. My book is going to be published soon. I just signed the contract and the publisher didn't mention it.
 

Guardian

just the worst honestly
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
3,320
Reaction score
443
Age
31
Location
denial
Hm. I would think so, since you bought it and she was posing with people. I'm not 100% sure though.
 
Last edited:

shaldna

The cake is a lie. But still cake.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
7,485
Reaction score
897
Location
Belfast
you should maybe talk with your publisher about this also.
 

blacbird

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
36,987
Reaction score
6,158
Location
The right earlobe of North America
If you bought it that doesn't necessarily mean you have the rights unless stipulated by the photographer. Might want to check with a copyright lawyer.

If you buy a book at a bookstore, that doesn't convey to you the right to reproduce that book freely. Unless the book is in public domain. Same principle applies here.
 

Deleted member 42

Hello all,
I have a photo of a Olympic gymnist. I am in that photo too. I bought it at a meet where she was posing with anyone for a price. The title of the chapter has her name in it but it isn't really about her and nothing is said negatively about her but do I have rights to that photo. My book is going to be published soon. I just signed the contract and the publisher didn't mention it.

No. You do not.

You need the permission of the photographer, and a release from anyone else in the picture who is identifiable--even though the gymnast was presumably paid.
 

WildScribe

Slave to the Wordcount
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
6,189
Reaction score
729
Location
Purgatory
No. You do not.

You need the permission of the photographer, and a release from anyone else in the picture who is identifiable--even though the gymnast was presumably paid.

This.
 

Monkey

Is me.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
9,119
Reaction score
1,881
Location
Texas, usually
I wonder who your publisher is; it seems like a publisher would have picked up on this as a potential problem and looked into it before planning the release of the book.
 

charlotte49ers

let it snow
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
3,092
Reaction score
919
Location
Georgia
You definitely need to contact the photographer. Because you own a print does NOT mean you own the rights to the image (I'm a photographer).

(and ditto about needing a release from anyone in the picture that is considered a primary subject)
 

colealpaugh

"Bear trumps Elephants!"
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
952
Reaction score
171
Location
Northeast Pennsylvania
Website
www.colealpaugh.com
You definitely need to contact the photographer. Because you own a print does NOT mean you own the rights to the image (I'm a photographer).

(and ditto about needing a release from anyone in the picture that is considered a primary subject)


Double ditto.

Possibly on the bright side, I've never said no to an author who requested to use one of my photos (probably a dozen books, incl. two covers), nor did I want anything more than a credit line.
 

Jamesaritchie

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
27,863
Reaction score
2,311
You may have the right to use it, and you may not. The only way to know is to contact the photographer.
 

MaryMumsy

the original blond bombshell
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
3,396
Reaction score
829
Location
Scottsdale, Arizona
Would the answer be any different if the photo in question is over 100 years old, a studio portrait of an ancestor, and there is no hope in hell of finding out who the photographer was?

MM
 

IceCreamEmpress

Hapless Virago
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 2, 2007
Messages
6,449
Reaction score
1,321
Would the answer be any different if the photo in question is over 100 years old, a studio portrait of an ancestor, and there is no hope in hell of finding out who the photographer was?

Yes, because the "over 100 years old" part means that it is in the public domain. (Presuming the print itself is over 100 years old, and that you're not using a copyrighted retouching/enhancing of it--that is an issue with, for instance, some of Mathew Brady's photographs.)
 

Theresa

Registered
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
I would be quick with obtaining permission because if you already signed a contract with your publisher, you have surely signed to have all rights necessary. So your publisher will hold you liable if any issues with that photo arise. On the other hand, if the photografer or the Olympic gymnist forbid you to use that photo, you have to explain that issue to your publisher as quickly as possible.

Good luck!
 

mayaone

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
189
Reaction score
8
I was really surprised I can't use a photo I am in. But I don't know who the photograper is because this was a meet in 1995. Who can I contact. Thanks all ps what If I blur her face and just show mine
 

Tirjasdyn

Outline Maven
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 21, 2005
Messages
2,182
Reaction score
183
Location
Mountain of my own Making
Website
michellejnorton.com
I was really surprised I can't use a photo I am in. But I don't know who the photograper is because this was a meet in 1995. Who can I contact. Thanks all ps what If I blur her face and just show mine

Organizers of the meet, agents of the gymnast...if you can't find anyone don't use it. Blurring it doesn't matter, you don't own the rights, because you didn't create it.
 

megan_d

Falling in the milk
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
801
Reaction score
123
Location
Perth, Western Australia
I am curious as to who your publisher is. If they knew you intended to use this photo when they signed you I'm surprised they didn't ask about rights then.
 

Terie

Writer is as Writer does
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 18, 2008
Messages
4,151
Reaction score
951
Location
Manchester, UK
Website
www.teriegarrison.com
I was really surprised I can't use a photo I am in. But I don't know who the photograper is because this was a meet in 1995. Who can I contact. Thanks all ps what If I blur her face and just show mine

To expand on what Tirjasdyn said, the copyright belongs to the creator (unless the creator sells the copyright), not the subject. In this case, the photographer is the creator, while you and the other gymnast are subjects. Thus, the rights to the photo aren't yours (or the gymnast's, for that matter), and you can't use the photo without the copyright owner's permission.

It would be similar to you writing an article about someone in your community. The person whom the article is about couldn't copy the entire article into a book they're writing without your permission, because you own the copyright to the article. And if they did want to use it, you'd be smart to ask for monetary compensation for your permission.

That's simply how copyright works. It's about the rights of the owner, not the subject.
 

colealpaugh

"Bear trumps Elephants!"
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
952
Reaction score
171
Location
Northeast Pennsylvania
Website
www.colealpaugh.com
I was really surprised I can't use a photo I am in. But I don't know who the photograper is because this was a meet in 1995. Who can I contact. Thanks all ps what If I blur her face and just show mine

There are always exceptions with different venues, but blurring a face only protects you from the gymnast recovering for unauthorized use of her likeness and not for using an image belonging to the photographer.

This is a 15 year old meaningless snapshot that I can almost guarantee the photog couldn't care less what you do with. But "almost guarantee" isn't 100%. Are you absolutely certain you didn't mention to the photog you might someday use it on a book cover? If they said "sure, whatever", then that would be binding. I'm also assuming you only bought the print and not the negative, and that you're scanning the photo. If the negative had been included, it would have assumed you had all rights.

Any chance other photogs were shoulder to shoulder with the professional?
 

thothguard51

A Gentleman of a refined age...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
9,316
Reaction score
1,064
Age
72
Location
Out side the beltway...
Would the answer be any different if the photo in question is over 100 years old, a studio portrait of an ancestor, and there is no hope in hell of finding out who the photographer was?

MM

Yes and Yes...

1...Over 100 years old would more than likely make it public domain by now. All you would have to do is a search to see if anyone else has used it or applied for a copyright on it, such as a publisher.

2...No chance in hell of finding out who the photographer was... The Orphan copyright law covers this one I believe. All the person using it has to do is make a diligent search for the photographer, artist, or writer associated with the work in question. Of course, it does not free you from law suits should the copyright holder appear later, but it will limit the damages....

If...I got the new Orphan Copyright law straight. Not sure I agree with it though because the search terms are rather narrow and vague...
 

adktd2bks

addicted to books
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
1,402
Reaction score
330
Location
midwest
If you're planning to blur her face then what is the point of using that photo at all? Just curious.
 

mayaone

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
189
Reaction score
8
wow, I had no idea. My publisher is in the UK and he has no idea who the gymnist is and how I got her photo. I don't want to blur her face but I think she is a public figure and I can use her photo without her permission if I am in it. As for the photograper, might the back of the photo have a clue. I haven't sent it to my publisher yet. He only knows about it by reading the chapter naming her. BTW,I did get permission to use quotes from a book "The four agreements" and signed a contract with them. I just won't use the photo if I can't find the photograher but it would be a shame because the point of the photo was about how funny I look next to her. I was 70 lbs more than I am now. I just signed the contract with my publisher this week and I still have to give them the "finished" product. Thanks all, and wish me luck Maya
 

BenPanced

THE BLUEBERRY QUEEN OF HADES (he/him)
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
17,865
Reaction score
4,640
Location
dunking doughnuts at Dunkin' Donuts
wow, I had no idea. My publisher is in the UK and he has no idea who the gymnist is and how I got her photo. I don't want to blur her face but I think she is a public figure and I can use her photo without her permission if I am in it. As for the photograper, might the back of the photo have a clue. I haven't sent it to my publisher yet. He only knows about it by reading the chapter naming her. BTW,I did get permission to use quotes from a book "The four agreements" and signed a contract with them. I just won't use the photo if I can't find the photograher but it would be a shame because the point of the photo was about how funny I look next to her. I was 70 lbs more than I am now. I just signed the contract with my publisher this week and I still have to give them the "finished" product. Thanks all, and wish me luck Maya
Doesn't matter. The photographer is the one with the rights to the photograph since they're the one who created the image. If the photographer didn't include any sort of contact information on the photo itself, usually on the back, or if you don't have some other document such as a letter or waiver from the photographer that explicity states your rights to reproduce the photo and permissions from others in the photo, I'm afraid you won't be able to use it.
 

Susan Coffin

Tell it like it Is
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
8,049
Reaction score
770
Location
Clearlake Park, CA
Website
www.strokingthepen.com
I don't want to blur her face but I think she is a public figure and I can use her photo without her permission if I am in it. As for the photograper, might the back of the photo have a clue. I haven't sent it to my publisher yet. He only knows about it by reading the chapter naming her. BTW,I did get permission to use quotes from a book "The four agreements" and signed a contract with them. I just won't use the photo if I can't find the photograher but it would be a shame because the point of the photo was about how funny I look next to her. I was 70 lbs more than I am now. I just signed the contract with my publisher this week and I still have to give them the "finished" product. Thanks all, and wish me luck Maya

Mayaone, you cannot use the photograph without permission of both the photographer and the gymnast, even if you blur her face. Would you be able to contact whoever set up the meet to find out who the photographer is? :)
 

Silver King

Megalops Erectus
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
12,438
Reaction score
8,932
Location
Florida (West Central)
Mayaone, you cannot use the photograph without permission of both the photographer and the gymnast, even if you blur her face...
The gymnast was a public figure at the time, so I wouldn't worry about getting her permission to use the image. But you'd better believe, as has been mentioned, that the photographer has to give consent to use his work.

A couple of years ago while browsing through a sporting magazine, I came across a picture I'd taken the year before. It's a shot of a tarpon jumping with the fisherman and his boat in the background. I know the man who was fighting the fish and sent him a copy of the image, which he then sold without my knowledge or consent. Not only did I recoup the money he was paid, but I also received a handsome check from the magazine as well.

Had the man asked me beforehand if he could sell the shot, I would have given him permission, in writing, stating that we split the proceeds from the sale. But he felt, much like the OP of this thread, that since he was one of the subjects in the photograph that he could do with it as he wished. He discovered the hard way that he was wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.