Who owns a digital image?

neilwoods

vax2002 wrote: »

If these images were taken outside of normal employment hours then the employer does not own copyright unless he specifically requested that the OP does this work.
Just as your employer does not own copyright to your holiday pictures, or pictures you take on a weekend of whatever activity you engage in, or that picture you painted last sunday.
Just because you work for someone it does not give that someone cart-blanch over your entire life.
If the images were taken in employers time and at the request of his employer they would be copyright of the employer.
However the OP has stated that these images were taken in his own time outside contracted hours of employment using his own equipment in his own premises then copyright to his image work remains his and having a job does not give an employer automatic rights to intellectual property created outside of the conditions of employment.
your employer may be able to claim you offered those images on good will, so you would have to withdraw any consent to good will
You are well within you rights to claim a fee for use of the images once you have stated that you require the company to desist use of your copyrighted material and give them a reasonable amount of time to desist from use of these images.
You can then serve notice on the internet site creator that they must desist from using the work or pay a licensing fee for a rights managed use upon the images.

But how many people take holiday photos for there company. The OP stated he made the website for them and took the photos for them.

vax2002

The content of the work has no relevance, the relevant word is commissioned, if his employer approached him and commissioned this work to be produced outside of his employment hours then the employer may have an argument, but as I understand it, the OP commissioned himself to produce works of a photographic nature and allowed his employer to utilise this work as a gesture of goodwill, that does not forfeit copyright to intellectual works no more than allowing your employer to have tea at your house gives him ownership of your house.
The cases referred to are of arguments arising on patents and ownership of intellectual property created whilst in employment, in employers time and at the instruction of that employer whilst in the pay of that employer.
A completely separate set of circumstances, this is work created by the OP, in his own time, at his own discretion and not paid for by anyone, he owns his own copyright, just same as you do to your holiday snaps.

neilwoods

Try and prove they were taken out of work hours though. Plus it doesnt matter when the photo's were taken, the photos were taken for work purpose's whilst in employment by them.

the commision part or contract would only apply if he was a self employed photographer hired by them to do a specific job.

fred7777

neilwoods wrote: »

Plus it doesnt matter when the photo's were taken, the photos were taken for work purpose's whilst in employment by them.

the commision part or contract would only apply if he was a self employed photographer hired by them to do a specific job.

Absolutely, the law says: "Where a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work is made by an employee in the course of his employment, his employer is the first owner of any copyright in the work subject to any agreement to the contrary." The photos were taken for work purposes whilst he was employed by the company therefore they were taken in the course of employment and belong to the company.

vax2002

I think you have not understand the word "Course" as in in the course of employment.
Proving when the images were taken is very easy on digital images, the files will have a exif stamp embedded within the metadata.

neilwoods

That;s assuming the camera's date is set correctly. No i understand the wording, course as in during the hours of his employment stated within his contract.

Firstly, it is his word against there's, so if it ever got to a court situation, they could argue he is a disgruntled ex-employee and they did indeed ask him to take the photographs and paid cash in hand, granted they can't prove it, just like he couldn't either.

Anyway it is pointless of us saying anything. Just re-read what the OP wrote, and he clearly states he spent a lot of time taking images of their products, not the word's THERE PRODUCTS. So you could argue he didn't have work's permission to take the photo's, also where were the photo's taken, at home on there premises.

dug123

Sooler wrote: »

Hand them back, you've chosen to leave the company, you have no interest in this. Why wouldn't you have done ? :think:

Hi, Thanks again for all the replies, I would answer this one first. The company are naive regarding the internet and have no idea regarding domain names etc and the way I found out about the new website was when the company which made it phoned me at home and asked me to change the nameservers! Following this telephone call I contacted my previous employers to confirm that this was their instruction and at the same time warned them that they would have to set up all their email addresses etc on the new .
I must admit that at this time it did cross my mind that I should just say "it has nothing to do with me, I will pass control over to you" but I would have to transfer the ownership (everything is in my name, along with other domain names I own).

If we look at the photos could I prove with exif data that the images are mine? I am no super photographer and whenever I too a picture I would take 20 of the same item from all angles so every picture they have on the website is part of a series and you I also have the intermediate phases of a finished image where I have removed the background from the original image I have thousands of images on my home PC.
They could never ever argue that they are not my images.

I would again reiterate that I was a driver and if I was asked to take any picture (damaged goods) I always used my phone to take thses images and I have no problem with them using those images for anything whatsoever.

fred7777

vax2002 wrote: »

I think you have not understand the word "Course" as in in the course of employment.
Proving when the images were taken is very easy on digital images, the files will have a exif stamp embedded within the metadata.

If an employee does the work and it is done for the benefit of the employer it's in the "course" of their employment.

exif stamps can be modified by freely available software.

dug123

neilwoods wrote: »

Anyway it is pointless of us saying anything. Just re-read what the OP wrote, and he clearly states he spent a lot of time taking images of their products, not the word's THERE PRODUCTS. So you could argue he didn't have work's permission to take the photo's, also where were the photo's taken, at home on there premises.

Re THEIR PRODUCTS, If you take a picture of a Ferrari surely it is not the property of Ferrari? Or Kylie Minogue?
As for the location, there are lots of different locations, Quite a few of the products are taken in my dining room (as you can tell from the original before I have deleted the background!) There is my local British Legion Carpark, Outside a local garage, In the estate where the company is based etc etc

Also just to confuse matters approx 10% of the pictures were taken after I left the company!
The background is that my wife became very ill and I gave up work to become a full time carer for her but I still took pictures and updated the website just to get out of the house and give me an occasional break (but NOT in any nasty sense, her friends would sometimes take her out for an odd day leaving my time free!)

fred7777

dug123 wrote: »

I would again reiterate that I was a driver and if I was asked to take any picture (damaged goods) I always used my phone to take these images and I have no problem with them using those images for anything whatsoever.

I know there are differences of opinion on your rights on this thread and just to add to the arguments there is another thing to consider.:)

Employees and employers can change the terms of their contract by agreeing to changes and working to them without actually changing the printed contract. For example if your employer asks you to work different hours to those on your contract and you do your contract has been changed without actually rewriting and signing the paperwork.

So by agreeing with your employer to create the website and taking the pictures it's quite possible that you would have added web designer and photographer to your "official" duties.