> Hi All,
> The focus is only on the wedding album. I believe that the copyright
> of the wedding album must mandatorily go to the bride and groom and
> not the photographer who is hired to provide the service of taking
> photographs. I have listed down the reasons in my blog at
> Can you guys comment on it? If anybody feels the way I feel, can you
> provide any further valid reasons to support it. (If this is not the
> right forum, please direct me to the correct forum.)
You said: That photographer basically wants to leech some money from my
brother, every time my brother wants a copy of his wedding album, to share
with family and friends.
I say: Your brother wants to leech from the photographer...he wants
something for nothing.
You also said: If the photographer retains the copyright, then the family is
locked to just one vendor. The photographer can then charge exorbitantly.
This is the current situation and it is anti-competitive.
I say: All things are negotiable. You had every opportunity to discover the
photographer's policies before hiring him; if you didn't like them you could
have negotiated or gone elsewhere.
You also said a lot of other stuff all of which is incorrect and
demonstrates your lack of understanding of copyrights. For example, all of
your "privacy" concerns are mush...the photographer cannot sell, publish or
even display the photographs of your wedding without your permission. If
you signed a release, you gave that permission.
In short, it matters not a whit what you believe...the copyright laws are
what they are and are meant to protect the creator from avaricious types
such as you and your brother. So there :)
dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico