Hi everyone!
The other day I decided to photograph a Building from a world-famous Japanese architect. I have no intentions to sell any of the work I have done I just but make it part of my portfolio. Has anyone been in this position before or questioned this before? I would like to know if it would be even legal to publish it as part of my portfolio.
Let's say the building has been already published, It's public and I didn't do anything senseless or different from the rest of the tourist that were around me, I just had a bigger/sexier/geekier equipment.
Any kind of feedback for me or experience, anywhere in the world will be well welcomed.
Cheers!
Seb.
Did someone say something to you? I don't understand what you're concerned about. People take photos of buildings everyday..
Well no but a well-known architect in my city I live in had a dispute with a friend, a local photographer because he published unofficial pictures in designboom. So since then I have worried about this and just wanted to know how more experienced people deal with this and if I should not have to worry at all. Also, have read that in places like France or Italy don't have Absolut "Freedom of Panorama" and this is why you can cause an infringement of copyright by selling Eiffel Tower pictures at night because, for example. Cheers!
Seb, it's all about intention and use. (disclaimer: I'm not an attorney)
Any building open to the public can be photographed without infringing on copyright or needing a model release. But the building is still private property so if you wanted to sell prints of the building or use the image in a way that generates revenue then of course you need a release.
But if you're standing in a public space to take the photo and would like to include it in your portfolio go right ahead.
Thanks Daniel for your comment, I just was very curious about this issue for a long time and thought would be nice to hear what more exp people had to say. Cheers.
From a United States intellectual property & usage perspective, as long as the photograph is taken on public land, you are in the clear. There are literally thousands of photographers selling cityscape and architecture work taken from the public streets of cities across the US.
If you are on private property, the property owner may have legal options available to them.
From my understanding, as far as your friend being harassed by an architect goes, if your friend took the photo from a publicly accessible spot, the architect has no legal recourse to pursue them for damages unless they can prove that the photos were taken with the intent of defaming the firm (which would cause them to lose money).
Understand this is in the USA only. I can't really speak toward usage rights in other countries.
Thanks, Rob that's very insightful. Just coming back to this thread now!