Legal Question in Intellectual Property in California

Copyright Infrigment
I asked a photographer if I could use her photo in some print advertising I had a graphics artist do. She agreed verbally to this use and there was no mention of payment. She came back 6 months later claiming that I never had permission to use this work and charged me 468.00 for a ''one time use''. She then found another ad that we had placed similtaneously to the other and is now charging us 968.00. We can't afford this and want to know what, if any, legal protection we have.

Asked on 9/16/06, 11:03 am

3 Answers from Attorneys

Richard Jefferson M.E.T.A.L. LAW GROUP, LLP

0 users found helpful

0 attorneys agreed

Re: Copyright Infrigment

Unfortunately, for that small amount of money (in the Court's eyes) the matter is not worth suing over and you really don't have any evidence so it would be hard to meet your burden of proof. You may have to chalk this one up to a lessoned learned and make sure you clear in writing any other pictures or other uses for advertising.

Answered on 9/16/06, 12:41 pm

Mark as helpful

Bryan Whipple Bryan R. R. Whipple, Attorney at Law

0 users found helpful

0 attorneys agreed

Re: Copyright Infrigment

The only legal protection you have is to convince a court that a verbal contract was made, AND that the contract called for no royalties. If this is a professional photographer and you are also a for-profit business, as it sounds, no judge or jury is likely to believe you were given a right to use the photographer's work without charge. If the photographer were an amateur or your end-use was for a charity or other non-profit, maybe. Looks like a loser under your circumstances, however.

Answered on 9/18/06, 5:16 am

Mark as helpful