Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward
So the photographer, has 998 images, which are not commercially viable. Does he/she need copyright protection on those images?
Actually, no. They're under the absolute control of their creator, and nobody has access to them to copy unless the creator lets them.
|
He needs copyright protection in case his memory card gets stolen or computer gets hacked. They should have the protection we offer to unpublished works. Because hey, he took 998 photos of ocean surf crashing against the rocks, sold two, and now has a lot of pictures of water and rocks. And maybe next year, a local university is having a beach party fundraiser for the new stadium, and will offer him $50 each for 2-4 photos for their ads & newsletters. Which is not what National Geo pays, but the photos were just sitting there on his hard drive; why not make some money off them, get his name in a new location.
Authors keep a lot of drafts & outlines; same kind of thing. Those should be protected--nobody else should be able to grab them & publish them. But he doesn't need the registered version of protection unless it becomes a problem. (Which is why copyright's always been "no need to formally register until you file a complaint.")
In 20 years though? If he hasn't found a buyer for those pics, he's not likely to. Let 'em go, throw them on SuperFlickr, and let grade-school kids see how professional photography works; let college kids find the ones with suggestive-shaped rocks & put funny captions on them.