Zoo requires ME to pay a license fee for MY photos! (pics)

Okay so a lot of speculation on this topic I had similar issue recently but with a wedding situation.

I was an invited guest and asked to take images at the events by the bride during the event. Even thought she had a hired a photographer for the event. Perhaps an error on her part contract wise.

I posted the captured evening events on my website, two weeks later the bride and groom suddenly went ballistic on me claiming they owned the copyright to all my images (preposterous) and demanded I remove the images of them. They even contacted my host provided claiming I violated their copyrighted images, preposterous again.

My host provider unpublished the images, I republished them within the hour, I called my host provider and politely reminded them of my contract agreement with them and it hasn't been an issue with my host service since.

See us copyright law http://www.copyright.gov/

Who Can Claim Copyright? http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wccc

Two days after demanding I remove the images, the bride audaciously posted these same images I took, and posted them on her own blog site with general references to me and that I took the pictures. (Perhaps another contract error on her part)

Also see this link, it provides case law information for all 50 US states.

In my state, their was a case similar enough that has a State Supreme court ruling on the matter, This one case was the ultimate case killer and protection and a great reassurance for me.

http://www.rcfp.org/photoguide/stateindex.html

The happy wedding couple has yet to show a single image from her hired photographer or videographer to this point it's been a couple months now.

As per the comments of destruction of your images, it is plain ridiculous.

You own them no can claim them without legal compellation, and no judge in his right mind would make you destroy them. Make a copy on a Disc, have a friend keep a copy or 2 at their house for safety.

O yeah registers them right away with the US copyright office.
http://www.copyright.gov/eco/index.html

They Zoo can claim a fee for your using them in a commercial fashion(Max of $250 or whatever is reasonable) but they have to prove that you use them for commercial use. They may not be able to claim a fee until you register and record a commercial sale.

Have another individual get a copy from the zoo of their commercial contract agreement and read the fine print of it. You may be exempt based on their own contract terms.

Information is Mighty Power when it comes to legal cases, that why law firms have huge libraries and staff who do research on previous cases all the time. No judge really wants to contradict or risk being overturned by another Judge.

That's why you always hear in movies about Case #1234 X defendant vs. X Plaintiff

Calm minds come to great results, work out a licensing arrangement with them.

Allow them to use said image or images for a specific term and time frame. Web use for example, they must place photo credit and link to your website, have them grant you a lifetime member status, your now a benefactor to the Zoo, Sell postcards of your images at the Zoo, Yes work out a deal, mark sure your deal has legal protections built info it for yourself, Contribute x $$ per card sale to zoo efforts, etc.

My experience tells me they really like your images and are trying to scare you without recourse or even intentionally. Most people are plain ignorant to law, they claim to be experts and use modified or outlandish stories to somehow claim it's a law.

Don't freak out, this is simply a new way to generate revenue,

It also helps to talk to the right people and approach them in the right way.

The top Administrator at the Zoo, come in with a proposal, Don't show your images on the cheap, ask top dollar for them, say Since this is a Not-for Profit I can waive my creative fee, also know as Pro Bono, and just charge them for your image licensing use, (posters, postcards, Banners, Displays, POP, Advertising, Etc)

It always helps to show the big expense then your can show what a great person that you are, work out a better deal, advertising and links to your website, helping the zoo generate revenues. This is huge for most Zoos’ they need or will never say no to a way to raise needed funds and recognition to their cause.

Good Luck.
 
... You make some good points.

The Zoo offers special events for photographers, and on the event
ticket and on their website for the events, they display the
following text:

"Photos taken at Denver Zoo are for your personal use only (including
recreational use and photo contests). Commercial photography (for
profit-making like stock photography) is prohibited without written
permission from our Marketing department. Commercial photography fees
start at $250 per image."

Being a good citizen, I contacted them about this, and am currently
discussing it with them.
Glad to hear you contacted them about it. Given the fact that this policy is obviously very clear, you really wouldn't have any case against them. As someone else mentioned, regardless of funding perhaps being public, it is still probably private property (you do not have the right to come and go as you please) and any rules can be set on private property. And this is fairly common policy as well as many parks, malls, and all sports stadiums have the same policy.

--
Christian Wagner
http://www.lifevicarious.com
448 Days Around the World
 
Interesting situation!

I didn't read through all the cases and I certainly agree that the bride doesn't own the copyright to your images. But on the flip side, I believe (though don't know for certain) that you do not neccesarily have the right to show those photos without express consent from the people in them especially considering these were not taken at a public event (a wedding would certainly be deemed by a court to be a private event).

So I think she can ask you to take them down (and you certainly don't have the right to profit on them without their agreement) but I think her basis for that request was innacurate as she certainly does not own the copyright to the images.

--
Christian Wagner
http://www.lifevicarious.com
448 Days Around the World
 
http://www.asmp.org/commerce/legal/releases/

You will need a Property Release, they own the animals and you are taking pictures of their property and selling it for profit. And you are actually on there property taking those pictures.

The law is complicated however, if you were at the zoo and photographed an animal attacking a person, then sold that image to the new media, you would not need a property release. Those types of pictures fall under journalism laws, however if you make posters of that image and sold it as art, you may.

--
Randy
 
...those are Commercial guidelines.
I'm thinking TV shows, Movies, Advertising Shoots
with Celebrities, etc.

Probably don't apply to most of us
taking photos on vacation. Even if you
hope to sell one some day. I can't imagine
listing locations ahead of time and paying
$500 / day for a permit. How do you know what
the weather is going to be like 10 days ahead
of time? How do you know where the moose will
be standing 10 days before?

maljo
 
"Ellis Vener's response is spot on to UK law certainly, so doubt it's different over there."

That's interesting but I am based in Atlanta GA (USA) and based my response on two different lawyer's explanation of the situation to me.
 
A wedding requires a a license granted by the State and pruchased within a county in the state. A wedding is classified in most states as a public event, it requries a notice being placed at the event in question that it is a priviate event for envited guests only. The capital City in my state has several venues that are rentable for private parties and they automatically Place a notice at the door or other entrances to the venue that clearly states that.

Most states have similar situations and may have specific laws addressing such situtaions. The venue in question is private property but is open to public acces that states publicly thet they invite the public to visit and stroll throut there lcations/venues. If the public has a reasonavble expectation of acces to a facility it is allowed to enter at their discretion, during the reuglar business hours.

THe venue public or private has they right to refuse entry to any particular persons for a time and place events/situatiions.

You must be asked to leave a property/ venue by a person of authority before a tresspass has occured.

If a realtor has an open house sign placed for a property showing, anyone may enter, anyone cannot enter your home if it has a for sale sign on the front lawn.

Their is a distininction, The venue in question was an event that I was invited to as a family freind and I was asked to take pictures at the event.

A clear distinction exist.

The US SUpremme court has ruled that "Time and Place are appropriate controls on acces to public property. This allows freedom of assembly and Speech, But it doens't allow for disruption of other rights. Such as a shop owners business being blocked by an organized protest on the public sidewalk outside the shop.

By renting or leasing a public facility you have been granted a time and place exclusion to the said venue/place. It grants the specific leaser rights but it aslo usally places restriction as well.
 
Fair enough. But asking you to take pictures and having them posted on the internet (and I'm assuming unknowingly to the B&G) for any and all to see are two different things.

While her owning the copyright to the image is preposterous (although I'm guessing a case could be made that she owns the copyright to things in the images), I think there is at least some grounds for her to ask the pictures to be removed from the site (but I don't know what her real motivation was for that request)
--
Christian Wagner
http://www.lifevicarious.com
448 Days Around the World
 
dammit I was going to mention property release forms... people often think it only applies to models...!!
http://www.asmp.org/commerce/legal/releases/

You will need a Property Release, they own the animals and you are
taking pictures of their property and selling it for profit. And you
are actually on there property taking those pictures.

The law is complicated however, if you were at the zoo and
photographed an animal attacking a person, then sold that image to
the new media, you would not need a property release. Those types of
pictures fall under journalism laws, however if you make posters of
that image and sold it as art, you may.

--
Randy
--
I am Badger, hear me snuffle!
----------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/lord_of_the_badgers/
 
Just give away your prictures.... I've met this crazy photographer who got all bent out of shape after I've taken pictures from his site to use on my site and in brouchures i've printed. Can you imagine - they guy demanded money saying images were his property... what a nut case!

So my recommendation - don't charge for your pictures - give them to people for free. Not like you need to make money from this, you know?
 
  • Like
Reactions: xtm
Regarding the zoo and their policy. Policy is one thing, but I doubt that the policy is a contract. Too bad you contacted them. You could wind up paying them a lot of money, and then not make any sales. Or suppose you pay them 1 grand and then make 1 grand in sales you would be working for nothing -- at least the animals get food and medical : )

Maybe you should charge the zoo for free publicity.
--

Nikon D3, Nikon D300, Nikon Lenses 10.5, 14-24, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 VR, 28 1.4, 60 2.8 AF-S Micro, 85 1.4, 135 2.0 DC, 300 2.8 AF-S EDII, Zeiss 50 1.4, Nikon TC-17E II 1.7x,Three SB800's, Canon G-9 & Underwater housing, Two Quantum 5d-r's, & More.
 
I've seen that policy at every zoo I've gone to... The last one was Santa Barbara. It's a very common policy.
--
jafo

D300, 17-55, 70-200 VR, 50 1.8, SB-800, Think Tank Digital Holster 20
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jafopix/
 
Below are some of my favorite shots from recent visits to the Denver
Zoo. C & C welcome. All except the last 3 are D3 + Nikkor 200 - 400
VR lens, sometimes with the TC 17E II, and mostly at ISO 1600,
usually on mono-pod. The clarity and sharpness of this lens is just
plain frightening. I LOVE this lens.

The Denver Zoo's policy is to require their written permission for
commercial use of photos taken at the zoo. This seems wrong-headed
to me. Is it legal? Do they have such legal rights? Do you know of
any other zoo with such a policy?

I'm currently negotiating fees with them. Their normal fee is $250
PER PHOTO for me to have the right to sell MY zoo images in my
gallery. YIKES!

























--
Paul Richman
http://PixelsByPaul.COM
 
The Denver Zoo's policy is to require their written permission for
commercial use of photos taken at the zoo. This seems wrong-headed
to me. Is it legal? Do they have such legal rights? Do you know of
any other zoo with such a policy?
Yes it is legal, the animals are theirs and you are on private property. I have been to many other places that require a fee, some to come in and shoot at all. In the case of most zoo's, you can shoot as long as you don't sell them. If you want to sell them, that's when it cost you.
I'm currently negotiating fees with them. Their normal fee is $250
PER PHOTO for me to have the right to sell MY zoo images in my
gallery. YIKES!
If the image can be sold, then it is worth it. If they are allowing you to pay per picture rather than for the lot then think of it this way. I can print one image at 16"-24" and sell it for $400 or more. The zoo gets to keep the money from the first sale. After that, the profit is all yours.

The real question is whether images taken at the zoo are good enough to sell at all? Calendars don't usually take zoo images, etc. If you have a market, then it's worth the price.

--
Tony

http://www.pbase.com/a5m/ http://AnthonyMedici.naturescapes.net/
 
I'm calling a big steamy pile of BS on this one.... they can't do anything about it. Don't pay those ba$tard$ any money. Sell your photos and let them have a try at you. Get a good lawyer if they harass you in any way. This is a good example of the government taking away your individual rights. Next thing you know, those commy liberals are going to tell you you can't own a gun.... BA$TAGE$!

; )
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top