[Pro] Website Images?

I just landed a new client who is unhappy with his previous website design company. Apparently, they just dropped off the face of the earth.

Anyway, my client would like to reuse some of the images from his existing website, but I’m not sure who owns them. I do know that they are not stock, because many of them are of the owner’s restaurant and staff. What are the rules on website image ownership?

Also, his former website was done in Joomla, so I’m not even sure the images can be easily extracted. BTW, I’ve avoided contacting the former company for fear that they may do something drastic, like turn off his existing site.


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

It doesn’t matter if it’s Joomla or something else, the images, whether part of the layout or uploaded through Joomla, will exist on the server, it’s just a matter of looking for them which should be fairly easy assuming you have server/ftp access.

Todd
http://xiiro.com

Also, his former website was done in Joomla, so I’m not even sure the images can be easily extracted.


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I don’t. Apparently all of the passwords and such reside with the former design company, whose owner and staff cannot be found. I’m sure I’ll also have issues with transferring the domain name as well.


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Who actually owns the domain name? The client or design firm? Was the hosting being provided by the design firm (or did they hire an outside company to host the site)? Or did the client setup the hosting account and provide the firm with the info?

Todd
http://xiiro.com

I’m sure I’ll also have issues with transferring the domain name as well.


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

The designer subcontracted the hosting and it looks like the hosting company owns the domain. I believe my client pays the designer for the hosting fees.


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

It depends a lot on where you are, and where the photos were taken.

In the USA, we live with the Copyright Act of 1975, which is actually quite nice to photographers and other visual artists. Roughly translated, “The act of creation defines a copyright in the work that belongs to the creator until it is explicitly transferred to another party.” There is no need to register this copyright, although registration confers some tooth-sharpening in cases of actual litigation. Tiny slices of copyright may be transferred to another party – the right to use the image for a limited period of time in a specific medium, for example – without conferring any other rights to the licensee, or changing the overall ownership of the image.

What you will need to research here is who paid the photographer to take these photos, and what rights they licensed in the process. Any rights not explicitly conferred by contract remain with the photographer. If your client already uses these images on the existing Web site, then you are probably clear, although your contract should explicitly hold you harmless in cases where the client provides you artwork without owning or licensing the rights to use that artwork. Getting the original photos in high resolution will probably take a trip to the original photographer, although the images as used in the current site are only a right-click away.

I am not a lawyer, but I got my degree in Advertising Photography in the early '80s, and we had quite a few classes on the topic, since it was how we were to make a living. I do not advocate anyone using artwork that they haven’t paid for – photography is a back-breaking hard job, with no pension or residual income unless you are very lucky in the stock photo market. Photographers (particularly location photographers) ought to be compensated like professional athletes, because the wear and tear on their bodies is similar!

Walter

On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:57 AM, RavenManiac wrote:

The designer subcontracted the hosting and it looks like the hosting company owns the domain. I believe my client pays the designer for the hosting fees.


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

On 19 Feb 2013, 1:20 pm, waltd wrote:
I do not advocate anyone using artwork that they haven’t paid for – photography is a back-breaking hard job, with no pension or residual income unless you are very lucky in the stock photo market. Photographers (particularly location photographers) ought to be compensated like professional athletes, because the wear and tear on their bodies is similar!

Walter

I absolutely agree with this. Quite frankly, I’m thinking about simply reshooting updated images because it’ll be a lot less problematic.


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

photography is a back-breaking hard job, with no pension or residual income unless you are very lucky in the stock photo market. Photographers (particularly location photographers) ought to be compensated like professional athletes, because the wear and tear on their bodies is similar!

I’ll second that.

s


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

When I was coming up in the trade and assisting other photographers, it always amazed me how many of them had bad backs, and not too coincidentally, would hire armies of assistants for what I considered the simplest of shoots. I just turned 49, and even though I only did photography for about 10 years (and much of that in the studio), I can certainly understand why.

Walter

On Feb 19, 2013, at 11:38 AM, seoras wrote:

photography is a back-breaking hard job, with no pension or residual income unless you are very lucky in the stock photo market. Photographers (particularly location photographers) ought to be compensated like professional athletes, because the wear and tear on their bodies is similar!

I’ll second that.

s


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I can certainly understand why.

Quite; I’ve had to give up lugging my 5x4 monorail around, though its costly days where numbered anyway. The popularity of the new micro 4/3 cameras are largely through many being fed-up with the weight of ‘high end’ pro kit with not that much loss in image quality relatively speaking. Very few get to shoot double page spreads, anyway the last time I had one it was from a 5Mp camera.

s


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options