Who owns the photos?

[duckiller01]

I work for a smaller performance shop in the US. I was brought in less than 10 months ago and things have taken a turn for the worst...

I was not brought in nor paid for the use of my personal camera equipment but the companies website and my job became strongly dependent of these things and my particular skill set, it almost became assumed.

My questions is... who owns these photos? I dont expect to be paid for the images used but I want to take them with me.

Thanks in Advance!

Rob

[jgrussell]

If you are a regular paid employee, and the photos were taken by you at your employer's direction for your employer's reasons and uses, then the photos are a "work for hire" and the copyright belongs to your employer. Read up on the Copyright Office website - circular on works for hire (http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf).

[HappySnapper90]

On a personal note I disagree. If the photos you took with your personal gear could not have been captured with a standard company P&S camera, I would rather grant the company a license to use the photos how they wish but hang onto the copyright. Just strike a compromise where both parties win.

[Big O]

Were you 'on the job' (not as a photographer) when the pictures were taken?

With the given information I'm with JGR on this one.

[JasonSTL739]

Did you sign something stating that the photos were via work for hire? Was the creation of the images within the "scope" of what you were hired to do or was it extra? Was it documented as such?

If yes, legally they own them.

If no... You own the images taken.

Where it complicated is if you took the images outside of what they hired you for, but were on their payroll and being paid at the time of creation. That can go both ways as I understand the laws. Also, it is very important that you took them with a device you owned in addition to this documented "scope" of your employment. I would bet you that because it was on your personal equipment, unless you signed something about the works being commissioned by your employer or some specific document about what your roles was.... that you own copyright and could win copyright in court if necessary.

[duckiller01]

Thank you all for the info. I will certainly do some additional research and read the recommended materials.

I was brought in as "Director of Sales and Marketing" the title never held water. I ended up handling/ updating the website, answering phones, dealing with retail traffic and customer service related issues.

Taking pictures was never discussed... I jumped in because the product images were not very good. When the owner realized I was good at this type of work he had me do more of it. However with my camera, batteries, lenses, flash, and tripods.

He mentioned once or twice that I could use his older Canon Kiss but I told him that I was more comfortable with my gear. I needed to fire the flash remotely anyhow and he had a hard time spending money on any of my needs... so I used what I had.

Thanks again for the advice and help.

[cory1848]

Using your own gear doesnt mean you own or not own the copyrights. You were on the job being paid a salary when doing this, I say its work for hire.

[S.Horton]

You took the photos as part of your job. Your employer owns them.

[JEC]

As disappointing as it may be, your employer owns the pictures.
Though it may be a poor analogy....... you wouldn't have rights to his website if you'd used your own computer to edit it.

[Alleh]

I might argue copyright if photography was not in your job description. Probably they belong to your work sense you were on the clock though.

[PhotosGuy]

I might argue copyright if photography was not in your job description. ...or in your contract.

Corporate Photography
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=414272

work-made-for-hire statutes
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=403625
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=4400919&postcount=19

Securing, Managing, and Sharing the Legal Rights (http://www.copyright.iupui.edu/youright.htm#MFH)
the work may still be deemed a work-made-for-hire only if it is specially ordered or commissioned and the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by both of them that the work shall be considered a work-made-for-hire. This rule applies only to certain types of works. Read the work-made-for-hire statutes for more information.

[fergpm]

Just my opinion here (NOT LEGAL ADVICE). I think that the majority are correct that the company "owns" them. Being a small business owner myself however if you are open, honest, direct but not demanding, I'd say they would be more than happy to allow you to use them in a portfolio as well. If you work a deal, get it in writing. Probably should consult an attorney to draft the document at least. If you do it professionally and non confrontational I'd say they are more likely than not to work with you.

Just my $.02.....