pschauss
Well-known
My wife and daughter have been regularly taking our granddaughter to the local Kiddiekandid studio. Last week my, when my wife tried to buy more prints she learned that the company had gone bankrupt. When she took one of the prints to a local CVS to get it scanned, they refused, citing copyright protection.
If we cannot buy prints from the original photographer is it still illegal to scan a print and make copies of it?
If we cannot buy prints from the original photographer is it still illegal to scan a print and make copies of it?
Dwig
Well-known
Quite possibly. Certainly, the fact that you can't buy prints from the original photographer has absolutely nothing to do with the issue.
When the company went through bankruptcy their remaining assets were distributed, to creditors and, if anything was left over, the owners of the company. Copyrights are assests. They could have been acquired by a creditor, one of the owners, or they could have been released into public domain. Its a matter for a copyright lawyer to investigate.
wgerrard
Veteran
You probably don't need a copyright lawyer to find out if you can make a copy of a photo you own.
First, did you acquire copyright to the photos you bought at KiddieKandid? (Even if you didn't, I suspect making copies for personal use could be considered Fair Use. Not that that is likely to convince the kid at CVS.)
Second, if not, then somewhere there are lawyers representing KiddieKandid in the bankruptcy proceedings. They should be able to answer copyright questions. Get it in writing to take along to CVS.
First, did you acquire copyright to the photos you bought at KiddieKandid? (Even if you didn't, I suspect making copies for personal use could be considered Fair Use. Not that that is likely to convince the kid at CVS.)
Second, if not, then somewhere there are lawyers representing KiddieKandid in the bankruptcy proceedings. They should be able to answer copyright questions. Get it in writing to take along to CVS.
Last edited:
bmattock
Veteran
The ongoing issue with companies like Walmart and others refusing to make copies of what they feel are 'commercial' or 'professional' photographs stems directly from their experiences being sued.
It is a double-edged sword; photographers want their copyrights protected, yet we photographers as consumers also want to be able to make copies of photographs we've purchased.
It can be a difficult proposition to explain to a person who has purchased a set of photos from a commercial studio that they don't actually own the rights to the photos. They paid money 'for the photos', yes, but not for the unlimited right to duplicate those photos.
As others have mentioned, copyright (as well as ownership) does not cease to exist with a bankruptcy. The assets, tangible and intangible, belong to someone.
What might be more expedient would simply be to buy a flat-bed scanner and make your copies. Then sell the scanner, if you feel you won't be using it again. Or ask a friend with a scanner to do it for you. This is not legal advice - if you want that, I'd check with a lawyer. But my opinion is that the holders of the rights to your photos, whomever that might be, would be very unlikely to even know about your photos, let alone object to your making copies of them.
My wife and I were fortunate; our wedding photographer decided to 'go digital' a number of years ago, and contacted us to offer us all the negatives of our wedding for a small amount of money. We accepted on the grounds that he was transferring all the rights to the photographs to us, not just the physical negatives. We can now do as we please with our wedding photos, they do indeed belong to us. Most people do not have that right, although many presume they do.
It is a double-edged sword; photographers want their copyrights protected, yet we photographers as consumers also want to be able to make copies of photographs we've purchased.
It can be a difficult proposition to explain to a person who has purchased a set of photos from a commercial studio that they don't actually own the rights to the photos. They paid money 'for the photos', yes, but not for the unlimited right to duplicate those photos.
As others have mentioned, copyright (as well as ownership) does not cease to exist with a bankruptcy. The assets, tangible and intangible, belong to someone.
What might be more expedient would simply be to buy a flat-bed scanner and make your copies. Then sell the scanner, if you feel you won't be using it again. Or ask a friend with a scanner to do it for you. This is not legal advice - if you want that, I'd check with a lawyer. But my opinion is that the holders of the rights to your photos, whomever that might be, would be very unlikely to even know about your photos, let alone object to your making copies of them.
My wife and I were fortunate; our wedding photographer decided to 'go digital' a number of years ago, and contacted us to offer us all the negatives of our wedding for a small amount of money. We accepted on the grounds that he was transferring all the rights to the photographs to us, not just the physical negatives. We can now do as we please with our wedding photos, they do indeed belong to us. Most people do not have that right, although many presume they do.
Gumby
Veteran
So, why do you want to copy the photographs? If for commercial purposes I believe that would violate copyright. For personal or academic purposes, look into the Fair Use clause of the copyright act.
iamzip
Ambitious, but rubbish
Try to see if there are any RFF members near you that have a scanner. Or you could certainly use it as an excuse to buy a cheap flatbed; I haven't checked recently but my refurbed epson was only about $60-70, and can scan negatives as well.
Gumby
Veteran
I'd have to agree with this statement. Places like that made their money already and generally don't look to reprints for revenue.