Giving a CD vs. giving the rights away?

I've seen some debates on here about giving away a CD of photos and how that isn't giving away the rights. Am I missing something here? When you give a CD away don't they have the right to reprint them at that point, or else why bother with the CD? What is the distinction?

a cd is a physical object. a right is a legal entitlement.

If I give a cd it has small size files with water marks.

A CD with no rights means the images are for personal viewing only. They don't have rights to reproduce them, or licensing rights to use them in advertising or promotional materials.

Commercial photographers will license their photographs and specific rights depending on the type of usage and distribution of the photograph. For example, a photograph to be used on a local realtors website will not cost as much to purchase the rights to as the same photograph intended for a multi-million dollar advertising campaign.

It's almost just like when you purchase a music CD from a store. You can listen to it for personal reasons, but you don't own any rights to use the music for business or promotional gains.

silvereagle135 wrote: I've seen some debates on here about giving away a CD of photos and how that isn't giving away the rights. Am I missing something here? When you give a CD away don't they have the right to reprint them at that point, or else why bother with the CD? What is the distinction?

Your car can probably go over 100mph. It is illegal to drive that fast in the US.

I would assume that anyone who wants a disc of high res files wants to be able to order prints and albums without going through the photographer, but having access to the high res files doesn't necessarily give them the rights to do so. I give my wedding and portrait clients a disk of files and permission to reproduce the photos for personal (non-business) use. Any commercial, business, or promotional use needs to be negotiated with me. They can make all the prints for themselves and family as they want, but if they want to use the photos on their real estate business website there would be an additional charge.

Thank you everyone. That clears that up.

Do print studios not print the photos if it appears they don't have permission? It would seem to me they wouldn't know the difference, especially at a place like Walmart or some other big corporate chain.

silvereagle135 wrote: Do print studios not print the photos if it appears they don't have permission? It would seem to me they wouldn't know the difference, especially at a place like Walmart or some other big corporate chain.

That is the law, and the fines are pretty steep. Some places are strict and others not so strict. Of course the self-serve kiosk is pretty much all about getting around copyright. Most full service labs take copyright protection seriously. They don't want the fines, but also professional photographers are their customers. Any big chain is going to train photo finishing staff on copyright law. They try to err on the side of caution, and may ask questions about photos that look "too good".

I guess it depends on the photographer, but hopefully pro work is recognizably better than amateur snaps.

Henry Peach wrote:

silvereagle135 wrote: Do print studios not print the photos if it appears they don't have permission? It would seem to me they wouldn't know the difference, especially at a place like Walmart or some other big corporate chain.

That is the law, and the fines are pretty steep. Some places are strict and others not so strict. Of course the self-serve kiosk is pretty much all about getting around copyright. Most full service labs take copyright protection seriously. They don't want the fines, but also professional photographers are their customers. Any big chain is going to train photo finishing staff on copyright law. They try to err on the side of caution, and may ask questions about photos that look "too good".

I guess it depends on the photographer, but hopefully pro work is recognizably better than amateur snaps.

How does a photographer prove hes the photographer then? if i walk into a print shop... would they actually turn me away if i dont have proof that i took the photos?? how does one prove that the photos on the disk were taken by yourself anyways??

geoffellis wrote:

Henry Peach wrote:

silvereagle135 wrote: Do print studios not print the photos if it appears they don't have permission? It would seem to me they wouldn't know the difference, especially at a place like Walmart or some other big corporate chain.

That is the law, and the fines are pretty steep. Some places are strict and others not so strict. Of course the self-serve kiosk is pretty much all about getting around copyright. Most full service labs take copyright protection seriously. They don't want the fines, but also professional photographers are their customers. Any big chain is going to train photo finishing staff on copyright law. They try to err on the side of caution, and may ask questions about photos that look "too good".

I guess it depends on the photographer, but hopefully pro work is recognizably better than amateur snaps.

How does a photographer prove hes the photographer then? if i walk into a print shop... would they actually turn me away if i dont have proof that i took the photos?? how does one prove that the photos on the disk were taken by yourself anyways??

As a matter of fact, I have been questioned several times at Walmart. Once upon a time, I had lots of prints made there, so they got to know me, and trust me. I slacked off for a few years, and the employees changed...consequently, I was 'informed' a couple times by new employees that they were not allowed to print copyrighted material. I laughed, of course.
The one time, they had every reason to question my authority. My father was a photographer, and had done a portrait of my mother ( back when I was about 6 yrs old ), which he then colored with oils ( he shot in B&W, and developed/enlarged it, too ). Dad & Mom both moved to Heaven, leaving us all ( there were five of us ) wanting the portrait. He had done a small version ( approx 5X7 ) as well, and I took that one. I scanned it, restored it as was needed, and proceeded to make wallet-sized copies for each of my siblings for Christmas one year. I arranged multiple copies onto an 8X10 blank canvas and wrote the single image to a CD. I took it to have printed at Walmart. I had to explain to three times to three people, the last being the manager, that my father was the photographer, and the photo was of my mother...taken many years ago...hand-painted, developed by my father...and that they were both deceased. They did finally print it for me, but I could see that they were still uneasy about it. Actually, I was glad...and told them so.
To 'prove' you own rights to an image, would be difficult. Another good reason to capture in RAW...you have the negative. If you send images away for printing, that would complicate things, but if you print locally, you can always take your camera to the shop ( if questioned ) and show them the RAW image via camera/card.

CWphotos wrote: To 'prove' you own rights to an image, would be difficult. Another good reason to capture in RAW...you have the negative. If you send images away for printing, that would complicate things, but if you print locally, you can always take your camera to the shop ( if questioned ) and show them the RAW image via camera/card.

I always print from a small SD card. why waste money on a CD. Putting the SD card back in the camera really doesnt prove any ownership whatsoever. the RAW file might... but many people dont shoot that.

It would make very little sense for me for anyone to turn away business like that. If they are concerned then simply have a liability waiver that releases the print shop from responsibility...

Tamgerine wrote: A CD with no rights means the images are for personal viewing only. They don't have rights to reproduce them, or licensing rights to use them in advertising or promotional materials.

Commercial photographers will license their photographs and specific rights depending on the type of usage and distribution of the photograph. For example, a photograph to be used on a local realtors website will not cost as much to purchase the rights to as the same photograph intended for a multi-million dollar advertising campaign.

It's almost just like when you purchase a music CD from a store. You can listen to it for personal reasons, but you don't own any rights to use the music for business or promotional gains.

How do you license your photographs/cd?

suzannegalephotography wrote: How do you license your photographs/cd?

Copyright info is here www.copyright.gov/

Usage rights/license would be determined in contracts and agreements between the client and photographer.

geoffellis wrote: It would make very little sense for me for anyone to turn away business like that. If they are concerned then simply have a liability waiver that releases the print shop from responsibility...

When you are summoned to court you will have to prove that you attempted to do the right thing. Almost all shops do have those waivers behind the counter, but like any legalities of this nature it's going to depend a lot more on your lawyer and the one that's against you. The waiver might not be enough to protect the lab. It's going to be up to the judge to decide whether the lab tried to do the right thing, or with a wink and a nod went for the easy money. Copyright violation fines can be significant, and would put many small, one or two shop labs out of business.

No one wants to turn away business, but as a small business owner you may be held responsible for the decisions you make. Chances of getting caught? Slim. Fines if you get caught? Huge. If you want to gamble with your business, well, that's your business. My bosses made it clear to us that they would rather err on the side of caution.

Where I live a statewide professional photographers' organization brought a copyright violation suit against a chain of grocery stores whose labs were reproducing pro photos, and won. The fine was several million dollars.

This is how it works in the USA. Laws and concerns about protecting photographers and intellectuals property rights are probably different in different countries. If the copyright violation fines in Australia are small, then maybe more business owners there feel it's worth taking a chance.

CWphotos wrote:

geoffellis wrote:

Henry Peach wrote:

silvereagle135 wrote: Do print studios not print the photos if it appears they don't have permission? It would seem to me they wouldn't know the difference, especially at a place like Walmart or some other big corporate chain.

That is the law, and the fines are pretty steep. Some places are strict and others not so strict. Of course the self-serve kiosk is pretty much all about getting around copyright. Most full service labs take copyright protection seriously. They don't want the fines, but also professional photographers are their customers. Any big chain is going to train photo finishing staff on copyright law. They try to err on the side of caution, and may ask questions about photos that look "too good".

I guess it depends on the photographer, but hopefully pro work is recognizably better than amateur snaps.

How does a photographer prove hes the photographer then? if i walk into a print shop... would they actually turn me away if i dont have proof that i took the photos?? how does one prove that the photos on the disk were taken by yourself anyways??

As a matter of fact, I have been questioned several times at Walmart. Once upon a time, I had lots of prints made there, so they got to know me, and trust me. I slacked off for a few years, and the employees changed...consequently, I was 'informed' a couple times by new employees that they were not allowed to print copyrighted material. I laughed, of course.
The one time, they had every reason to question my authority. My father was a photographer, and had done a portrait of my mother ( back when I was about 6 yrs old ), which he then colored with oils ( he shot in B&W, and developed/enlarged it, too ). Dad & Mom both moved to Heaven, leaving us all ( there were five of us ) wanting the portrait. He had done a small version ( approx 5X7 ) as well, and I took that one. I scanned it, restored it as was needed, and proceeded to make wallet-sized copies for each of my siblings for Christmas one year. I arranged multiple copies onto an 8X10 blank canvas and wrote the single image to a CD. I took it to have printed at Walmart. I had to explain to three times to three people, the last being the manager, that my father was the photographer, and the photo was of my mother...taken many years ago...hand-painted, developed by my father...and that they were both deceased. They did finally print it for me, but I could see that they were still uneasy about it. Actually, I was glad...and told them so.
To 'prove' you own rights to an image, would be difficult. Another good reason to capture in RAW...you have the negative. If you send images away for printing, that would complicate things, but if you print locally, you can always take your camera to the shop ( if questioned ) and show them the RAW image via camera/card.

This is very surprising. I had no idea they were so strict or even cared, especially at a Walmart. I wonder if it just depends on the manager though? Maybe your particular Walmart just as a guy training people who is a stickler for the rules and thus the employees follow suit as well?