Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic

talondi · Joined: 14 Jun 2005 Posts: 64

Hi there,

I don't post often but read daily and know that there are some extremely informed souls on these forums. So I wish to ask for some of your wisdom with a copyright issue. It's a bit of a long story but I'll try to be brief.

A customer commisioned an artist to do some drawings (of a sculpture the customer had done) for him on computer. The guy didn't finish the job but the customer had paid him in advance and is taking him to court. He desperately needs these drawings finished as he is selling his sculpture. I am quite capable of doing the finishing touches but I would not be able to do them from scratch.

Now, who is the copyright owner? And could I get in trouble for finishing these images off? Can I do it if I get the customer to sign something?

This one confuses me because the computer drawings are of the customer's own artwork so I don't know who has copyright and I feel bad for this guy because he can't do what needs to be done to finish the work and to hire someone else to start again would cost him a fortune.

The finishing touches are simply a bit of a stand and some touch up on the colors with a little bit of text added.

Any help out there???

Who has copyright? Can I do this for him legally?

Thanx, and thanx again!!!

gracey · Joined: 24 Aug 2005 Posts: 2418 Location: Ontario, Canada

I'm no expert on legal matters but the owner of the copyright on the drawings could be the guy who created the drawing, unless the contract between the client and drawer states that the copyright is transferred to the client (purchaser). It's a tough issue. If they weren't on bad terms the client could just get a written agreement from the drawer, but given the situation, that's unlikely. Also, the fact the drawings are not complete may have some bearing on the issue, I really don't know.

For instance, when you go to a photog's studio to have your portrait done, you get the photos, but you don't get the copyright to the photos. In most instances, you can't then take those photos and have them reprinted by a photolab because the photographer owns the copyright on the photograph.

andresr · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2005 5:39 am

With design is a bit different from photography. I am just gonna give my opinion from what I have heard and from what I was taught, I haven't got proof of this nor have read it from a reliable source but:

When someone is doing a design for you its not like photography. Normally the employer gets the copyright. So If I am developing a website for example I dont get the copyright to it, its the company and whoever employed me and they are free to sell and resell that work I did.
It makes sense otherwise lots of employees would go away and reproduce and resell work they do for their employers.

In the case of these drawings the artist who started drawing them in my opinion cannot hold the copyright because they are drawings of a sculpture which is copyrighted to the sculptor who produced it.
The guy was paid to do something and he didnt do it, that's how I see it.

gracey · Joined: 24 Aug 2005 Posts: 2418 Location: Ontario, Canada

talondi · Joined: 14 Jun 2005 Posts: 64

Well I have been doing a bit more research and come across some pretty interesting stuff.

I still don't have the answer to my question, but I will consult a copyright lawyer and see what they say about this strange situation.

But, in the meantime, I have been checking the copyright laws here in Australia and have found that if a photographer is hired to take wedding photographs or portraits that the copyright appears to belong to the customer!!!

Here's a link for anyone who's interested:-

http://www.copyright.org.au/pdf/acc/InfoSheets/G035.pdf

Also, it seems that prior to 1998, anyone that paid for a photograph owns the copyright (that's a different sheet, have a look around the site if you are interested) so that changes things a bit for restoration and scanning of pics as I guess as long as the customer paid someone to take them, it is okay to fix and change them.

It all seems very different to what I believed.

Graphic artists do not seem to hold copyright if they are working for someone in the normal course of their job but may retain copyright if commissioned.

Horribly confusing stuff!

Thanx for your replies so far.