Find solution
How long is the holding period?

How do copyrights apply to photographs of a commune holding all in common during the period in question?

  • In the 1970's I belonged to a "spiritual community" whereas we held all material in common. It was registered as a church and we had a minister, etc... No one owned any personal property and we all worked for the common good - myself as a carpenter earning money to bring back to the community. A few others were our photographers and took thousands of pictures during that time. Of course, myself and others were paying for their film, food, shelter, etc. Now, many years later after the dissolution of this arrangement, the photographer claims copyright of all the photos. Furthermore, they don't allow fair use by even the people who were there at the time of the photos. Are there any similar cases you are aware of and/or can you provide an off-the-cuff opinion on this matter? My thinking is that perhaps a compromise of sorts whereas people who lived in the community longer than one year during a time period when all was held in common...would have fair non-commercial use of the photos taken during (example) a five year period of 1972-77. This period represents the lion's share of both the photos and the community efforts.

  • Answer:

    Woot, good fact pattern!  Unfortunately my off-the-cuff answer is that unless  there is a legal document binding all of you together and specifically including intellectual property the photographer does own the copyright. So you are on the right track in looking for a negotiated settlement and what you suggest sounds quite fair.   From a negotiation (as opposed to legal) point of view you need to figure out an angle that gives you some leverage without making things overly contentious, as if things get contentious, you will likely lose.

Fred Zimmerman at Quora Visit the source

Was this solution helpful to you?

Other answers

It is very unlikely that any use that the people in the photos make would be "fair use". Photographs are pretty hard to fit under that exception to copyright because you have to use a "minimal amount" of the source work and that doesn't work with a photo. You can use a paragraph from a book, but how do you use part of a photo? Also your derivative work has to be ABOUT the original, such as a movie review or book review. And it has to be unharmful to the profits that might be made by the photo. In this case the main source of profit is selling licenses to the people in the photos, so it is hard to claim that fair use by those specific people is unharmful. But, the standards of the community might constitute a verbal contract. The community might indeed share the copyrights of the photos for the period you are discussion. But that is something you would have to prove in court in a copyright infringement lawsuit. Note, "commercial use" of these photos isn't really relevant. You can't make commercial use of someone's image without a model release. But people often thing commercial use just means making profit; it doesn't. It means promoting products, services or businesses. It means making advertisements with the photos. You mean "non-profit" use, not "non-commercial", I think. This is a legal argument over a verbal contract covering ownership of intellectual property. It will need lawyers and a mediator or judge to resolve. Good luck.

Todd Gardiner

Related Q & A:

Just Added Q & A:

Find solution

For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.

  • Got an issue and looking for advice?

  • Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.

  • Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.

Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.