# Can a Photographer Sell Pics of My Dog? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 19, 2006, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164 "2006-02-19T04:17:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![PapSett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecc23a/32.png) [@PapSett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PapSett)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/1 "2006-02-19T04:17:37Z")
I was just browsing eBay, and ran across a T shirt that I really liked at first glance… and I took a closer look , and thought , hmmm… those eyes look familiar… It is my Gordon Girl Kharma !!! [http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7198654071&fromMakeTrack=true](http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7198654071&fromMakeTrack=true) This picture was taken at the Soaring Gull Circuit shows in Virginia Beach in Oct. 2004. Here is the link to my PhotoBucket copy of the pic: [![](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v20/PapSett/My%20Babies/KharmaCharm.jpg) ](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v20/PapSett/My%20Babies/KharmaCharm.jpg) My question… is it ethical for the photographer to use the picture of my dog without my permission? I really don’t mind, but it WOULD have been nice to at least recieve a free shirt… _sigh_ ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/2 "2006-02-19T04:28:54Z")
Do you actually own the rights to the photograph, or were they retained by the photographer (assuming you weren’t the photographer)? Did you sign a release of any kind when the photo was taken? Is the photographer who took the original pic the same person making the shirts? (If, as the auction says, there are 100s of breeds, it would make sense for it to be run by someone whose business is taking photos at shows) ---
**Author:** ![marymargaret](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@marymargaret](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marymargaret)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/3 "2006-02-19T04:34:54Z")
The crucial question is what kind of release did you sign? ---
**Author:** ![PapSett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecc23a/32.png) [@PapSett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PapSett)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/4 "2006-02-19T04:35:19Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > Do you actually own the rights to the photograph, or were they retained by the photographer (assuming you weren’t the photographer)? Did you sign a release of any kind when the photo was taken? Is the photographer who took the original pic the same person making the shirts? (If, as the auction says, there are 100s of breeds, it would make sense for it to be run by someone whose business is taking photos at shows) The photo was taken by a professional photographer at the show (In celebration of Kharma getting her first point at her first show). I don’t remember signing any sort of release. The person selling the shirts is the same one that took the pictures. This just feels wrong to me; I would not have minded them using the picture in the least, but when you consider that I paid her close to $100 to take the pictures in the first place, it seems to me that I should have at the very least gotten a few free shirts out of the deal… ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/5 "2006-02-19T04:38:00Z")
> [@PapSett](#): > > My question… is it ethical for the photographer to use the picture of my dog without my permission? I really don’t mind, but it WOULD have been nice to at least recieve a free shirt… _sigh_ Ethical mmmm maybe maybe not. Legal, sure. IIRC it doesn’t matter what the subject of the picture is, the rights belong to the person who took the picture. My undersanding is that even if I owned a photo studio, I set up a picture with my gear, my camera, my lights, the subject might even be my dog, I got the camera settings all the way I want them, then I have you, my employee on my time come and push the shutter realease, then you own the picture. Of course I’m not sure that’s totally correct, but it’s always been my basic understanind. As a side note. My grandfater-in-law has boxes and boxes and boxes of old grusome photos. He used to be a crime scene photographer and since he still owns the right to the pictures he still has them in his house. Although he says he can’t even look at some of them anymore. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/6 "2006-02-19T04:42:07Z")
It’s possible also that whatever papers you signed to enter the show included a clause disposing the rights of any photographs taken by the official photographer, if the host club’s contract with said photographer disposed the rights to him. Sitting fees are generally understood not to include the rights. This is why you have to send the proofs back once you’ve picked out the shots you want prints made of. If a few shirts are all you want out of the deal, why don’t you just email this guy, identify yourself and your dog, explain your situation and ask him if you can get a shirt or two just on general principles? ---
**Author:** ![marymargaret](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@marymargaret](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marymargaret)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/7 "2006-02-19T04:44:25Z")
> [@Joey P](#): > > Ethical mmmm maybe maybe not. Legal, sure. IIRC it doesn’t matter what the subject of the picture is, the rights belong to the person who took the picture. But using those photos in a commercial venture require an entirely different type of release. ---
**Author:** ![PapSett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecc23a/32.png) [@PapSett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PapSett)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/8 "2006-02-19T04:47:02Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > It’s possible also that whatever papers you signed to enter the show included a clause disposing the rights of any photographs taken by the official photographer, if the host club’s contract with said photographer disposed the rights to him. Sitting fees are generally understood not to include the rights. This is why you have to send the proofs back once you’ve picked out the shots you want prints made of. > > If a few shirts are all you want out of the deal, why don’t you just email this guy, identify yourself and your dog, explain your situation and ask him if you can get a shirt or two just on general principles? Ah, but this photographer was NOT the show photographer, she was doing PORTRAITS , not show pictures. There was a totally different one doing the ‘official’ show pictures. I did drop her a line thru the ‘ask seller a question’ feature on eBay, and identified myself and Kharma, told her what a shock it was to see MY dog looking back at me, and said I would love a couple shirts, but can’t afford them (they are WAY overpriced !!). I likely won’t hear anything till Monday, as she goes to shows on weekends, but we’ll see where (if anywhere) this goes. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/9 "2006-02-19T04:54:20Z")
> [@marymargaret](#): > > But using those photos in a commercial venture require an entirely different type of release. If it were a photo of **PapSett** herself, I’d say yes. The smooshy part of the answer here involves the fact that it’s a photo of a dog, which generally has no rights of privacy or expectation of ownership of its own image. If I take a candid photo of some anonymous someone’s German Shepherd puppy tied to the cast iron fence outside a cafe, I can (if I recall correctly) make that image into calendars, paperweights, t-shirts, etc., without a reasonable expectation of a percentage from the dog’s owner, especially if I never even met the person because he was inside the cafe having lunch. It’s only when we get into images of individual human beings that the expectation of control over your image comes into play. As **Joey P** posted, this may not be ethical. It’s most likely perfectly legal, though. ---
**Author:** ![PapSett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecc23a/32.png) [@PapSett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PapSett)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/10 "2006-02-19T05:02:07Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > If it were a photo of **PapSett** herself, I’d say yes. The smooshy part of the answer here involves the fact that it’s a photo of a dog, which generally has no rights of privacy or expectation of ownership of its own image. If I take a candid photo of some anonymous someone’s German Shepherd puppy tied to the cast iron fence outside a cafe, I can (if I recall correctly) make that image into calendars, paperweights, t-shirts, etc., without a reasonable expectation of a percentage from the dog’s owner, especially if I never even met the person because he was inside the cafe having lunch. It’s only when we get into images of individual human beings that the expectation of control over your image comes into play. > > As **Joey P** posted, this may not be ethical. It’s most likely perfectly legal, though. But… this was not a candid image, randomly taken. It was a picture _I_ paid her to take of my dog. This is what is setting so wrong with me. I think it would have been a common curtesy for her to contact me, tell me what her plans were, and ask permission to use Kharma’s picture, AND of course, offer to give me a few shirts and other various items for using my diva dog. I just think it’s rude. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/11 "2006-02-19T05:08:04Z")
> [@PapSett](#): > > I just think it’s rude. Absolutely agreed. Nothing I’ve posted should be read as arguing you out of feeling like you should have at least been asked permission. ---
**Author:** ![marymargaret](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@marymargaret](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marymargaret)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/12 "2006-02-19T05:08:12Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > If it were a photo of **PapSett** herself, I’d say yes. The smooshy part of the answer here involves the fact that it’s a photo of a dog, which generally has no rights of privacy or expectation of ownership of its own image. > > As **Joey P** posted, this may not be ethical. It’s most likely perfectly legal, though. But this was a paid gig. The OP paid the photographer to take the photo. ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 9:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/13 "2006-02-19T09:56:29Z")
Surely the person commissioning the image has the rights ? ---
**Author:** ![Hilarity\_N.Suze](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hilarity_n.suze/32/6223_2.png) [@Hilarity\_N.Suze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hilarity_N.Suze)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 10:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/14 "2006-02-19T10:05:35Z")
> [@marymargaret](#): > > But this was a paid gig. The OP paid the photographer to take the photo. That doesn’t matter, the photog still owns the rights. There is a case (Rogers v. Koons) where a couple hired a photographer (Rogers) to take pictures of their eight German shepherd puppies. It was quite a cute [photo](http://www.tourolaw.edu/lsac/Puppies.gif). The couple paid him $200 for the sitting and the prints, but Rogers owned the image and displayed it in his portfolio, exhibited a print of it, and sold the image to both private collectors and licensed it for use in an anthology. So the picture got around. At some point sculptor Jeff Koons got hold of it and used it as the basis of a work he called “String of Puppies.” The owner of the puppies saw a photo of the sculpture in the newspaper, and mentioned it to the photographer. Rogers, **the photographer** , sued Koons, and the court ruled it was a derivative work. I believe Wikipedia has the story but I can’t get there right now. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/15 "2006-02-19T14:32:15Z")
> [@Joey P](#): > > IIRC it doesn’t matter what the subject of the picture is, the rights belong to the person who took the picture. IAAPhotographer, but IANALawyer. Yes and no to this. In general, the rights do belong to the person who pushes the button or triggers the camera. However, in many work-for-hire arrangements (which I refuse to do), the rights are transfered to the person who hired you. A lot of studios and wire services, for example, require you to surrender your rights to the photograph as a condition of your employment. As for the OP, as far as I understand it, the photographer should have had the owner of the dog sign a property release if the photograph was to be used for commercial use. For editorial use? No release required. For eBay, yeah. However, the issue seems to be confused. Some photographers say it is required. Others say no. Towards the end of [this thread](http://www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=206622), there’s the following post: > [@](#): > > No. The answer is no. You do not need a model release to use a picture of a domestic animal. > > You are asking the wrong question. > > You do however need a property release to be able to use an image of someone’s animal for anything other then editorial use. Most stock agencies do not reqire that you have one, just as they will not require that you have a model release for a human model, but not having one severly limits the way the image may be legally used by the client. This reflects the way the law has been explained to me. I don’t know whether the release is an extra measure of cover-yer-assitude or a requirement, but any photographer who does this for a living should included a cause in their contract to cover these bases. ---
**Author:** ![Tabby\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Tabby\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tabby_Cat)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/16 "2006-02-19T14:58:16Z")
I think it’s important to make clear that it is the copyright in the photograph itself, and not ANY picture of the dog. That said, the rights in the photograph should belong to the photographer. An exception would be if the photographer was your employee, as employers generally own the copyrights of works produced by employees unless contracted out of, but it would be hard to say in this case that the photographer was your employee. I would probably guess that he was an independant contractor at best, if he was the official photographer of the show. With regards to the notion that the owner of the property needs to sign a release, I think it’s more a CYA measure than a real legal requirement. [http://www.nylawline.com/articlephotog1.htm](http://www.nylawline.com/articlephotog1.htm) > [@](#): > > In Natkin et al v. Winfrey et al.,[xxviii] for example, defendants (“Winfrey”) had retained plaintiffs to photograph the “Oprah Show” and its guests. Winfrey then published a book containing eleven of these photographs. The photographers sued, alleging copyright infringement and claiming that they had only granted rights for the images to be used for publicity purposes. > > Winfrey argued, among other things, that because she controlled the underlying subject matter – Oprah, the guests, their clothes and expression, the sets, and the “look” and “mood” of the show – she was a co-author and jointly owned the copyright in the photos with the photographers. She was free, therefore, to include the photos in her book. > > The Court disagreed. “[T]o establish co-ownership of the photograph copyrights, the defendants must show that ‘the parties intended to be joint authors at the time the work was created [and] . . . that [their] contributions to the works were independently copyrightable.’”[xxix] Although the Court found that evidence as to the parties’ intent was ambiguous, defendants’ contributions to the photographs were not independently copyrightable.[xxx] The Court pointed to Copyright Office rules that “the nature of the thing depicted or the subject of the photograph . . . is not regarded as a copyrightable element.”[xxxi] Winfrey therefore had no copyrightable interest in the photographs. This is also the case in English Law, but I’m not too sure about whatever state you’re in. Really, if all you want is a t-shirt, it might be better to simply ask for one. You might get it, you might not, but lawyers cost a lot more than T-shirts, and really, unless you’re looking for a share of the profits, it’s quite unlikely you’ll come out even. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/17 "2006-02-19T15:16:19Z")
> [@casdave](#): > > Surely the person commissioning the image has the rights ? Nope. When you pay to have your portait taken, the photographer retains the rights. That’s why you cannot take a print into Walmart and have it duplicated; it would violate the photographer’s copyright, and Walmart (or whoever) will refuse to make copies of copyrighted photos for anyone but the copyright holder. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/18 "2006-02-19T15:17:45Z")
> [@PapSett](#): > > I really don’t mind, but it WOULD have been nice to at least recieve a free shirt… _sigh_ > > … > > it seems to me that I should have at the very least gotten a few free shirts out of the deal… > > … > > AND of course, offer to give me a few shirts and other various items for using my diva dog. 😃 If this thread goes much further, you’ll be looking to take her camera and her house! ---
**Author:** ![PapSett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecc23a/32.png) [@PapSett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PapSett)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/19 "2006-02-19T15:28:45Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > 😃 > > If this thread goes much further, you’ll be looking to take her camera and her house! LOL… I honestly am not looking to gain any profit thru this. (besides a shirt or two 😉 ) I just , for lack of a better word, find it incredibly RUDE that I was not told or better yet , asked , if they could use MY dog to pad their pockets. I know not everyone feels this way, but my dogs are my children… and I don’t think anyone would want their kid’s pictures used in this manner without their permission. ---
**Author:** ![marymargaret](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@marymargaret](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marymargaret)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2006, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164/20 "2006-02-19T16:34:26Z")
So what are you (OP) gonna do? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-photographer-sell-pics-of-my-dog/345164.md?page=2)