Don't just grab a photo from the internet, it could cost you a lot of money!

You can easily find photos, videos or texts on the internet, but that does not mean that you can simply use them yourself. Most of those works are protected by copyright. You may also not use images or videos that you take from Facebook or Instagram without the creator's permission. If you do, it is punishable and could cost you a lot of money. "That photo is open and exposed on the internet, so I can also use it for my own website, my social media channel or printed matter." It is perhaps one of the biggest misconceptions about online copyright.

Request permission and pay

To avoid high bills and expensive claims, it is safest to automatically assume that everything you find on the Internet is copyrighted. This means that you must always request permission from the author or rights holder before using the work in question yourself. Listing the author's name still does not automatically give you the right to use the work if you do not have permission.

Sometimes permission and a few good agreements are sufficient, but there is often a fee in return. This can be done, among other things, by purchasing a license to use a specific work.

Photos on social media

Photos and other images that you find on social media such as Facebook, X, Instagram or Linkedin are also protected by copyright. Whether those works are in a closed group, a public or a protected profile does not matter. It is always the creator who retains ownership of the works, not the social media platforms. It is therefore better to not only mention "Source: Facebook" with the work, but also the name of the author himself. If you have received permission for this in advance, of course.

Use of photo material and copyright

A photographer's copyright means that the photos taken by the photographer may not be used without the photographer's permission. The photos may not be distributed or used commercially. The photos may also not be edited (e.g. with Photoshop), cut or changed without the photographer's permission.

In principle, the author-photographer is the only one entitled to reproduce the photo and distribute it publicly in any way. However, he can license or even transfer his copyrights, in whole or in part, with the exception of certain moral rights, to a third party (= “rights holder”), which then means that that right holder, within the limits of the permission obtained, himself has certain rights. , which in principle belong exclusively to the author; sometimes also the right to further exploit the photos themselves.

Method for photo use “Right of Use” (Commercial Licenses)

If you want to use a specific photo, you will first have to check who the author or rights holder is. You must then contact the author or rights holder and obtain specific permission from him or her to use the photo for the purposes you propose. It is important to clearly agree (1) which photo it concerns, (2) what use - commercial or otherwise - you want to make of the photo (for example use for illustration in an advertisement), (3) through which "medium" ” you want to do so (for example offline in a magazine or online on a website), (4) for how long the authorization to the agreed use applies (for example one year or for an indefinite period), (5) for which territory the use applies ( for example, only in Flanders or the whole of Belgium or throughout the world. and (6) what compensation you owe to the author or rights holder for the agreed use. From an evidentiary point of view, it is advisable to agree on all this in writing, especially when it concerns to an author-natural person, with regard to whom in principle only a written and clearly defined permission is enforceable.

Copyright ©

When a photo is taken by a professional photographer, it must be assumed that this photo was created after an intellectual effort by the photographer in which an attempt is made to capture a moment, fact or event in a specific way and with a certain desired effect. to bring.

In view of the case law of the Court of Cassation, it can be stated that the required originality consists of two components. A work is original when, on the one hand, it is based on a demonstrable activity of the human mind and, on the other hand, it bears the stamp of the personality of its creator.

Copyright protection applies equally to works created online and offline, so that the author of a website or of creations created on a website enjoys the same protection as the author of a classic work of literature or art.

For photography, it is the intrinsic original character of the photos that is decisive for the assessment as author's work.

For example, the arrangement of the objects to be photographed within a certain spatial environment and the shooting angle of the camera allows the photograph to have a clear composition, giving a visual impression of the power of the photographed object rather than being the result of a intellectual activity of the photographer, which means that the photos bear his personal stamp and are therefore original and protected by copyright. It is completely irrelevant that the photos were taken on commission?

The fact that the client has indicated which objects should be photographed and at what location does not exclude the originality of the photos.

Anyone who wants to use a work has the obligation to check whether the work is protected by copyright. When the photographer has made several choices regarding the angle of view, the duration of the exposure, the moment of the shot, the composition, etc., the result obtained is the fruit of a skill and an intellectual effort on the part of the author and enjoys he therefore enjoys the protection of copyright.

By simply copying a photo from a photographer, the photographer suffers direct damage. By not mentioning the name, he also suffers moral damage.

If the name of the photographer's photographer is not mentioned on a photo reproduction, the author misses an opportunity to gain a certain reputation as a photographer and he also suffers moral damage, now that it appears that an artist derives satisfaction from the recognition of his work .

What is the difference between © copyright and licensing?

The difference between copyright and licensing is that when you have copyright, you own the actual photo and decide what to do with it. While licensing means you are leasing the rights to use your photo.

More info www.sofam.be.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE | Pascal Vandecasteele Photography “Since1965”

All photographs and content on this website are the copyright and exclusive property of © Pascal Vandecesteele 1965-2023 unless otherwise stated and are protected by the European Union and international copyright laws and treaties.

The use of any photographs or other material contained herein, in whole or in part, for any purpose whatsoever, including but not limited to reproduction, storage, data mining, manipulation, digital or otherwise by use of computer or other electronic means or by any other method or means now or hereafter known, is prohibited without the written permission of Pascal Vandecasteele

NO PHOTOS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PUBLIC DOMAIN and therefore may not be downloaded. Violations of this copyright notice will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and violators will be held legally responsible for any damages resulting from such violation.

PHOTOGRAPHS ARE NOT ROYALTY FREE AND ANY SPECIFIC USE WILL REQUIRE A FEE. To find out more about using any of my photos, please contact us for more information about rights use fees, terms and conditions. info@since1965.be'