Licensing Lawyers for Richmond, Virginia

Yes, you can transfer rights to your photos, but the type of agreement you use determines what rights the client actually receives. A standard Photography License Agreement typically gives the client permission to use your photos under defined terms while you retain ownership of the copyright. If your client is asking for full ownership, that requires something more: a written copyright assignment. Licensing vs. Copyright Transfer When you license your photos, you’re giving the client a right to use them for specific purposes—say, for a website, in print ads, or across social media. You still own the images and can license them to others unless the license is exclusive. A license can be narrow or broad. For example, you might grant a non-exclusive, perpetual, worldwide license for all commercial uses, or limit it to a single use in a single country for one year. Everything depends on the terms you set. This is the most common arrangement in freelance photography because it preserves your ability to earn future income from the same work. Transferring the copyright, on the other hand, means giving up your legal ownership altogether. The client becomes the new copyright owner and gains the exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, display, modify, or even re-license the work. You can no longer use or sell the photos yourself unless you retain certain rights in the agreement. A copyright transfer must be in writing and signed by you under 17 U.S.C. § 204(a). If the client wants full ownership, you either need a standalone Copyright Assignment Agreement or include a clearly written assignment clause in your contract. Key Clauses for Either Option Regardless of whether you're licensing or assigning rights, your agreement should be explicit about what’s being granted. First, clarify the scope of rights by identifying what the client can and cannot do with the images. List permitted uses such as commercial, editorial, or personal, as well as the geographic territory, time limits if any, and whether the client may modify or sublicense the photos. Next, define the compensation structure, whether it is a flat fee, based on royalties, or conditional on specific uses. Then address any rights you intend to retain. For example, even in a full copyright assignment, you might include a license-back clause that allows you to use the images in your portfolio, marketing materials, or for competition entries. Don’t overlook technical details. List exactly what the client will receive: number of photos, file formats, resolution, editing level, and delivery method. If you're not providing RAW files, say so. If delivery is contingent on payment, make that clear too. Red Flags and Special Situations Be cautious about contracts that include “work for hire” language. Under U.S. law, a freelance photographer’s work doesn’t qualify as a work for hire unless it meets specific statutory categories and there’s a written agreement that uses that exact term. Otherwise, you're the default copyright owner. Clients sometimes insert the "work for hire" clause by default, but agreeing to it without understanding the implications can strip you of your rights from the moment the photo is created. If you're considering a copyright transfer, ask yourself whether you’re comfortable never using those images again, even for your own marketing. If the answer is no, consider negotiating a broad license instead, or insist on a license-back provision. You can always charge more for a full transfer since you're giving up long-term control and potential revenue. And remember, copyright assignments are permanent unless otherwise stated. If the client doesn’t use the images or disappears, you don’t automatically get the rights back. You’d need to build in a reversion clause if you want the rights to return to you after a certain period or under certain conditions. If you're navigating a licensing agreement or copyright transfer and want legal guidance, the attorneys on Contracts Counsel can help you get it right.

Hi there, Whether a Video License Agreement allows you to use the videos for commercial purposes depends entirely on the terms of the specific license. Not all video licenses are created equal, and the permitted uses can vary significantly. Here are a few key points to consider before proceeding: How to Know if Commercial Use is Allowed: Check for “Commercial Use” Language: The license should explicitly state whether commercial use is permitted. Look for terms like: “Commercial use allowed” “Use in advertising or promotional content” “Monetized projects” Distinguish Between License Types: Personal or Editorial Use: These usually do not permit use in product promotions or paid campaigns. Royalty-Free or Commercial Licenses: These often do permit business use, but always check the fine print. Watch for Restrictions or Limitations: Even if commercial use is allowed, some licenses limit: The number of views or distributions Modifications to the content Platforms where it can be used (e.g., online vs. broadcast) Exclusivity & Resale: Be sure the license does not prohibit derivative or promotional use if you are editing or combining clips. Also, resale or redistribution is usually not allowed unless specifically stated. Always Keep a Copy of the License Terms: If a dispute ever arises, having clear documentation of the license terms protects you legally. Before purchasing, I highly recommend reviewing the full agreement carefully or having an attorney take a look to ensure your intended use aligns with the license rights. If you would like assistance reviewing the agreement before you proceed, I would be happy to help. Best regards, Jerome Lucas Newell, Esq. Business & Intellectual Property Attorney

You will have to explain why the state of Florida is involved in this matter? I suggest you write a letter to National Practitioners Database to explain the matter clearly and provide proof of you licensing.

Hello! My name is Dolan and I'm happy to answer this question and I'm sorry to hear about your situation. The short answer to your question is that it depends very heavily on what's in the agreement. A well-drafted agreement would have information about what a party can do if the other party breaches the agreement. Here, you said they weren't providing regular reports or paying the royalties, which is a breach, but it does not automatically mean you have a right to terminate the agreement. What you can do for sure is threaten to sue. The reason is that this is a breach of contract. A breach of contract simply means that one party was obligated to perform and they have either not performed or have said that they will not perform. (Restatement (Second) of Contracts.) This applies regardless of whether the agreement was written or done orally. Typically, the aggrieved party is entitled to be returned to the same position they were in before the breach. What you could do in the interim is suspend any licensing of course; however, the more immediate option is to send a demand that they perform their obligations. Let us know if you have any other questions!