Re: [Leica] Re: Korda sues

[chucko@siteconnect.com (Chuck Albertson)]

Austin,

Whether you agree with it or not, that's the law in this country (the
U.S.)---freelance workers who create something original, even if someone is
compensating them for it, have the copyright to what was created, unless
they are bonafide employees (with salary, benefits, and all that other stuff
that freelancers have to take care of themsleves, usually at a much higher
cost than an organization has) of whoever they do the work for, or expressly
transfer all or part of their rights to the work. It's not unique to
photography, either. Writers, musicians, and other creative types have the
same rights to the work they create as independents. The design examples you
give (computers, toasters) are generally performed by *employees* of the
manufacturers, and copyright issues don't arise (although other intellectual
property issues often do). If a magazine or other publisher wants to
purchase all the rights to the work they commission, they can try to do so,
but it will cost more.

Chuck Albertson
Seattle, Wash.
>
> Gee, you ARE looking for trouble ;-)
>
> Well, I completely disagree with this 'entitlement'.  I fail to understand
> why anyone could believe that when they are paid to DO a job in the first
> place, they are somehow entitled to be given MORE money down the road for
> that job they were already paid in full for.  Are you going to give BACK
> money if the ad campaign is a flop?  NO?  They why should you be given
MORE
> money if it's a success.
>
> No other industry does business this (in my opinion "absurd") way.
Imagine
> if EVERY person who had a design element towards your computer (all those
> programmers), your car (all the design engineers and assemblers..) etc etc
> 'shared in the money being made from their work' aside from GETTING PAID
IN
> FULL FOR THE JOB IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>
> Gee, we have to charge $1,842 for the toaster, well, because, we have to
> pay royalties to each of the guys, for their 'creative efforts' used in
the
> design.  Who's to say where 'creative effort' stops, they guy assembling
> your car, well, he believes he is 'creative' in how he does his
'art'...and
> who are you to say he isn't?
>
> I'm for everyone making money, don't get me wrong...but the point is, the
> photographer is paid for all their time and expenses anyway, so why should
> they get any more money than that?  No one else does in any other
> profession.
>
> Now, if the photographer did the work for reduced rate, or on his/her own,
> then it's a different story.  But being paid for a job, the person paying
> you for the job, I believe, owns the work they paid you to do.
>
> I know others here strongly disagree with me here.  This is all I'll say
on
> this issue, in this thread anyway ;-)
>
>
>