License for Selling Your Digital Pics

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by ljsstudios, Jan 21, 2004.

  1. ljsstudios

    ljsstudios Guest

    Just curious if anyone can answer this question: Do you need a
    license of any kind to take pics and sell them as long as they are
    your own? If so, what would be the steps in obtaining one.
     
    ljsstudios, Jan 21, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ljsstudios

    Bob Salomon Guest

    In article <>,
    (ljsstudios) wrote:

    > Just curious if anyone can answer this question: Do you need a
    > license of any kind to take pics and sell them as long as they are
    > your own? If so, what would be the steps in obtaining one.


    You in the US or somewhere else?

    If you want to start a business then you need to register with the state
    you will be running it from, get a tax number, form a corporation or
    what ever business type would work best for your situation, etc. An
    accountant or attorney can get you set up.

    You don't need a license to take pictures. You need to comply with your
    state laws and any applicable Federal laws on opening and operating a
    business.

    --
    To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
     
    Bob Salomon, Jan 21, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Bob Salomon wrote in part:


    > You don't need a license to take pictures.


    Give it a couple of years.

    --
    It Came From C. L. Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
    http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net
     
    Unclaimed Mysteries, Jan 21, 2004
    #3
  4. ljsstudios

    C Guest

    On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:16:34 -0800, ljsstudios wrote:

    > Just curious if anyone can answer this question: Do you need a license of
    > any kind to take pics and sell them as long as they are your own? If so,
    > what would be the steps in obtaining one.


    Unfortunately, photographers do not need to be licensed.

    Two choices:

    1. Keep it cash'n'carry. Just don't get caught by IRS or your state's
    revenue department.

    2. Keep records. Contact your state regarding sales tax collection.

    The advantage to having a sellers' permit is that it makes you a business
    and being a business is actually good for business.
     
    C, Jan 21, 2004
    #4
  5. ljsstudios

    Chris Quinn Guest

    "ljsstudios" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Just curious if anyone can answer this question: Do you need a
    > license of any kind to take pics and sell them as long as they are
    > your own? If so, what would be the steps in obtaining one.


    You took the picture, so you own the copyright and can do whatever you want
    with them, assuming you haven't assigned the copyright to someone else - see
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/3416629.stm - any photos
    taken in a British prison become copyright of the prison service - if you
    don't agree, you can't take any photos

    If they contain recognisable people, you may have an issue with invasion of
    privacy.

    If you are using models, get them to sign a release form first.
     
    Chris Quinn, Jan 21, 2004
    #5
  6. ljsstudios

    Jeremy Guest

    >
    > You took the picture, so you own the copyright and can do whatever you

    want
    > with them, assuming you haven't assigned the copyright to someone else -

    see
    >

    I believe that the OP was really asking if he needed to have some sort of
    special permission to take photographs.

    Laws are somewhat different in different jurisdictions, but in general, you
    need no "license" or other "permission" in the US to photograph objects
    visible in public places. There are some limited exceptions for sites that
    may be critical to National Security (nuclear power plants, military
    installations?)

    The hazy part is in photographing peoples' likenesses, or someone else's
    children. You need a model release to use such photos commercially. My
    local newspaper has a strict policy of not publishing photos where anyone's
    likeness can be ascertained. So, for example, a photo of a park would be
    ok, but not if you can clearly see the faces of the people strolling there
    (unless they've signed releases).

    It is doubtful that anyone would pursue legal action against an individual
    for having violated their privacy (might be different if the defendant had
    deep pockets--like a newspaper). Common sense generally is all you need.

    If you photograph street scenes, landscapes or cityscapes, you will have no
    problem. Just be mindful of individuals' right to privacy--even if it is
    not specifically prohibited, you will do well to respect their right to be
    left alone if they so choose. That "in your face" style of street
    photography is offensive to many, including me.
     
    Jeremy, Jan 21, 2004
    #6
  7. C <> writes:

    > On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:16:34 -0800, ljsstudios wrote:
    >
    > > Just curious if anyone can answer this question: Do you need a license of
    > > any kind to take pics and sell them as long as they are your own? If so,
    > > what would be the steps in obtaining one.

    >
    > Unfortunately, photographers do not need to be licensed.
    >
    > Two choices:
    >
    > 1. Keep it cash'n'carry. Just don't get caught by IRS or your state's
    > revenue department.
    >
    > 2. Keep records. Contact your state regarding sales tax collection.
    >
    > The advantage to having a sellers' permit is that it makes you a business
    > and being a business is actually good for business.


    I imagine you do have to watch out for local zoning rules if you have clients
    come to your house for studio shots. Particularly if you don't get along with
    your neighbors.

    I suspect if your house is not zoned commercial, you might be in violation if
    you do significant work of any kind from your home (ie, run photoshop or do
    your own printing), but mostly the zoning laws are to restrict traffic.

    --
    Michael Meissner
    email:
    http://www.the-meissners.org
     
    Michael Meissner, Jan 21, 2004
    #7
  8. ljsstudios

    Bob Salomon Guest

    In article <%JyPb.17922$>,
    "Jeremy" <> wrote:

    > OP was really asking if he needed to have some sort of
    > special permission to take photographs.


    Then how do you explain the subject that he used?

    --
    To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
     
    Bob Salomon, Jan 21, 2004
    #8
  9. ljsstudios

    Jeremy Guest

    "Bob Salomon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <%JyPb.17922$>,
    > "Jeremy" <> wrote:
    >
    > > OP was really asking if he needed to have some sort of
    > > special permission to take photographs.

    >
    > Then how do you explain the subject that he used?
    >
    > --
    > To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.


    I defer to your superior understanding of the OP's question.
     
    Jeremy, Jan 21, 2004
    #9
  10. ljsstudios

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Just curious if anyone can answer this question: Do you need a
    > license of any kind to take pics and sell them as long as they are
    > your own? If so, what would be the steps in obtaining one.


    No licence needed, unless you want to sell pictures of people. In that
    case you'll need their written permission (a so-called "model release").

    In some cases if you want to sell the photo of a building or of another
    object you need the permission of the owner (a so-called "property
    release").
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405060/
    Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
    Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
     
    Alfred Molon, Jan 21, 2004
    #10
  11. ljsstudios

    Canopus Guest

    "Chris Quinn" <> wrote in message
    news:bumb16$s8g$...
    > "ljsstudios" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Just curious if anyone can answer this question: Do you need a
    > > license of any kind to take pics and sell them as long as they are
    > > your own? If so, what would be the steps in obtaining one.

    >
    > You took the picture, so you own the copyright and can do whatever you

    want
    > with them, assuming you haven't assigned the copyright to someone else -

    see
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/3416629.stm - any

    photos
    > taken in a British prison become copyright of the prison service - if you
    > don't agree, you can't take any photos
    >
    > If they contain recognisable people, you may have an issue with invasion

    of
    > privacy.
    >
    > If you are using models, get them to sign a release form first.
    >
    >


    Only in an extreme totalitarian society. Copyright and privacy laws are a
    different matter and can be extremely complicated especially international
    copyright.

    Rob
     
    Canopus, Jan 21, 2004
    #11
  12. ljsstudios

    The Pointman Guest

    What would be the wording on a "Model Release"?



    "Alfred Molon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    > > Just curious if anyone can answer this question: Do you need a
    > > license of any kind to take pics and sell them as long as they are
    > > your own? If so, what would be the steps in obtaining one.

    >
    > No licence needed, unless you want to sell pictures of people. In that
    > case you'll need their written permission (a so-called "model release").
    >
    > In some cases if you want to sell the photo of a building or of another
    > object you need the permission of the owner (a so-called "property
    > release").
    > --
    >
    > Alfred Molon
    > ------------------------------
    > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405060/
    > Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
    > Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
     
    The Pointman, Jan 22, 2004
    #12
  13. ljsstudios

    agent yelow Guest

    The Pointman wrote:
    > What would be the wording on a "Model Release"?
    >



    it would be a waiver on being able to use shots of somone/something for
    comercial use. Most of the times in group situations like camps they
    put it in with that package of crap to sign, and it's more of an anti
    waiver that states that you do not wan't you or whomever to be used in
    promotional stuff.
    ~ay
     
    agent yelow, Jan 22, 2004
    #13
  14. ljsstudios

    WMAS 1960 Guest

    Try doing a GOOGLE search on "Model Release" Include the quotation marks.

    You will get several examples of model releases that you might be able to use
    and adapt for your situation. Incidentally, you might also look up "Property
    Release". As I recall, they are similar exept that a property release would
    give permission to use photos of a piece of property rather than a person. A
    piece of property could include a sculpture or other piece of art, a car, boat,
    plane..... or a house, building or other architectural structure etc.

    >What would be the wording on a "Model Release"?
     
    WMAS 1960, Jan 22, 2004
    #14
  15. ljsstudios

    Frank ess Guest

    The Pointman wrote:
    > What would be the wording on a "Model Release"?
    >
    >
    >

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/editorialphoto/

    Check out the database on this group, and their Web site. Plenty of good
    downloadables that would meet your needs or come close.

    Frank S
     
    Frank ess, Jan 22, 2004
    #15
  16. In some locals you may have to obtain a business licence if you are selling
    photos. But you would have to check the local town/city regulations to find
    this out.
    Michael
    "Chris Quinn" <> wrote in message
    news:bumb16$s8g$...
    > "ljsstudios" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Just curious if anyone can answer this question: Do you need a
    > > license of any kind to take pics and sell them as long as they are
    > > your own? If so, what would be the steps in obtaining one.

    >
    > You took the picture, so you own the copyright and can do whatever you

    want
    > with them, assuming you haven't assigned the copyright to someone else -

    see
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/3416629.stm - any

    photos
    > taken in a British prison become copyright of the prison service - if you
    > don't agree, you can't take any photos
    >
    > If they contain recognisable people, you may have an issue with invasion

    of
    > privacy.
    >
    > If you are using models, get them to sign a release form first.
    >
    >
     
    Michael Neville, Jan 22, 2004
    #16
  17. ljsstudios

    Ryan Guest

    "Jeremy" <> wrote in message news:<%JyPb.17922$>...
    >My
    > local newspaper has a strict policy of not publishing photos where anyone's
    > likeness can be ascertained. So, for example, a photo of a park would be
    > ok, but not if you can clearly see the faces of the people strolling there
    > (unless they've signed releases).


    Is this in the United States? There is absolutely no reason to obtain
    a release for a news photo taken in a public place.

    > It is doubtful that anyone would pursue legal action against an individual
    > for having violated their privacy (might be different if the defendant had
    > deep pockets--like a newspaper). Common sense generally is all you need.


    There is no expectation of privacy in a public place.


    > If you photograph street scenes, landscapes or cityscapes, you will have no
    > problem. Just be mindful of individuals' right to privacy--even if it is
    > not specifically prohibited, you will do well to respect their right to be
    > left alone if they so choose. That "in your face" style of street
    > photography is offensive to many, including me.


    Obviously going right up to someone and taking photos without
    permission isn't nice. But when you go into public, you are forfeiting
    any "privacy" you have. There are small exceptions (if you're a woman
    walking downtown and your skirt flies up and a photographer snaps your
    photo and publishes it, you could have cause to sue for invasion of
    privacy; but if you are running around half-naked, too bad).
     
    Ryan, Jan 22, 2004
    #17
  18. ljsstudios

    Jeremy Guest

    "Ryan" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Jeremy" <> wrote in message

    news:<%JyPb.17922$>...
    > >My
    > > local newspaper has a strict policy of not publishing photos where

    anyone's
    > > likeness can be ascertained. So, for example, a photo of a park would

    be
    > > ok, but not if you can clearly see the faces of the people strolling

    there
    > > (unless they've signed releases).

    >
    > Is this in the United States? There is absolutely no reason to obtain
    > a release for a news photo taken in a public place.
    >
    > > It is doubtful that anyone would pursue legal action against an

    individual
    > > for having violated their privacy (might be different if the defendant

    had
    > > deep pockets--like a newspaper). Common sense generally is all you

    need.
    >
    > There is no expectation of privacy in a public place.
    >
    >
    > > If you photograph street scenes, landscapes or cityscapes, you will have

    no
    > > problem. Just be mindful of individuals' right to privacy--even if it

    is
    > > not specifically prohibited, you will do well to respect their right to

    be
    > > left alone if they so choose. That "in your face" style of street
    > > photography is offensive to many, including me.

    >
    > Obviously going right up to someone and taking photos without
    > permission isn't nice. But when you go into public, you are forfeiting
    > any "privacy" you have. There are small exceptions (if you're a woman
    > walking downtown and your skirt flies up and a photographer snaps your
    > photo and publishes it, you could have cause to sue for invasion of
    > privacy; but if you are running around half-naked, too bad).


    Are you offering a qualified legal opinion?
     
    Jeremy, Jan 22, 2004
    #18
  19. ljsstudios

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Ryan wrote:

    > There is no expectation of privacy in a public place.


    Not exactly. It depends on WHO YOU ARE.
    Ironically, the more "public person" you are, the least public
    privacy you are granted by the law. Basically a paparazzi is
    allowed to take a picture of a famous actor in a park or any
    other public place while he can't take a picture of Joe Average
    without his consent (*.) At least this is how it works in the US,
    although it somewhat varies from state to state (California being
    the most radical: maximum protection for the unknown, minimum
    for celebrities.)

    (*) Unless he doesn't intend to publish it, of course.
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 23, 2004
    #19
  20. ljsstudios

    Larry Guest

    In article <xf7Qb.14925$>,
    says...
    > Ryan wrote:
    >
    > > There is no expectation of privacy in a public place.

    >
    > Not exactly. It depends on WHO YOU ARE.
    > Ironically, the more "public person" you are, the least public
    > privacy you are granted by the law. Basically a paparazzi is
    > allowed to take a picture of a famous actor in a park or any
    > other public place while he can't take a picture of Joe Average
    > without his consent (*.) At least this is how it works in the US,
    > although it somewhat varies from state to state (California being
    > the most radical: maximum protection for the unknown, minimum
    > for celebrities.)
    >
    > (*) Unless he doesn't intend to publish it, of course.
    >


    In the US, you can pretty much take photos anyplace it is not
    specificaly restricted.

    Once you have the photos the use of those photos is restricted by the
    purpose or intent of the use.

    Example:

    You take a photo on a city street, and it happens to include two
    or three people who are NOT the actual subject of the photo.

    You take that photo and hang it in a gallery so people can see the
    photo. Do you need a model release for the people who happen to be in it
    should you sell the print?? SIMPLE ANSWER = NO!

    Same photo used in an advertisement for a product???
    SIMPLE ANSWER = YES!

    Though the law is not worded EXACTLY that way throughout the States, it
    IS the way it has been interpreted many, many times, when some photo
    artist sold a print, then later had to fight to keep his money in court.

    In other words, if you end up in a photo that ends up in an art gallery
    or something similar, unless you actually POSED for the photo, no
    reputable lawyer would take your case should you sue.

    (then again, how many REPUTABLE LAWYERS are there?)

    --
    Larry Lynch
    Lasting Imagery
    Mystic, Ct.

    et
     
    Larry, Jan 23, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jens Haase
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,019
    Walter Roberson
    Jan 29, 2004
  2. ljsstudios

    License for Selling Your Digital Pics

    ljsstudios, Jan 20, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    374
  3. Hellenic Mensa
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    450
    John McWilliams
    Aug 30, 2004
  4. =?Utf-8?B?SmVyZW15IFdvbmcg6buD5rOT6YeP?=

    Request for a downgrade from x64 OEM license to 32-bit OEM license

    =?Utf-8?B?SmVyZW15IFdvbmcg6buD5rOT6YeP?=, Aug 23, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    58
    Views:
    2,780
    Cari \(MS-MVP\)
    Sep 23, 2005
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,007
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page