fired realtor is trying to recoup her losses

[Oahu_Sunsets]

What is the name of your state Hawaii?

A realtor who hired a professional photographer, while she was representing me had given me a copy of the digital photos. If the photography was "works made for hire", does that transfer of copyright extend to me as the client ?

A bitter, realtor who I let out of her contract early (from her whining about expensive advertising), is now basically accusing me of theft, and trying to coerce me to reimburse her to use the photos that were shot of my property.

The way I understand it is that if they were made under a "works made for hire" arrangement (which seems to fit the situation), then she doesn't have exclusive copyrights to hold over me without some documented evidence pointing to the photographer assigning exclusive rights to the realtor. If there was no such agreement, and the situation is "works made for hire," she should have no claim for reimbursement.

If the copyrights actually reside with the photographer, I would be much more amenable to compensating the photographer than the parasite of a realtor who's crying foul as a function of her miserable unprofessionalism.

 

[Zigner]

Why don't you just give the photos back? I'm sure you can take your own.

 

[rowz]

Review your listing contract with the Real Estate Agent and see what the T&C are for termination of the listing. Also review the art qwhere it says who pays for the advertising and promotional materials for their efforts. If the pics are used on the realtors promo materials and the web-site then I believe that in the general rules of the real estate practise the Agent is on the hook.

Contact the photog and see if he will sell you the photos......Excluding the ones that the Agent used.

 

[HomeGuru]

What is the name of your state Hawaii?

A realtor who hired a professional photographer, while she was representing me had given me a copy of the digital photos. If the photography was "works made for hire", does that transfer of copyright extend to me as the client ?

A bitter, realtor who I let out of her contract early (from her whining about expensive advertising), is now basically accusing me of theft, and trying to coerce me to reimburse her to use the photos that were shot of my property.

The way I understand it is that if they were made under a "works made for hire" arrangement (which seems to fit the situation), then she doesn't have exclusive copyrights to hold over me without some documented evidence pointing to the photographer assigning exclusive rights to the realtor. If there was no such agreement, and the situation is "works made for hire," she should have no claim for reimbursement.

If the copyrights actually reside with the photographer, I would be much more amenable to compensating the photographer than the parasite of a realtor who's crying foul as a function of her miserable unprofessionalism.

**A: then work out a deal with the photographer directly.

 

[divgradcurl]

Just as an aside, a "work for hire" doesn't mean "I paid someone to take the pictures for me," it means "one of my employees took the pictures within the scope of their employment." If you don't have an employee-employer relationship, or a written contract specifying that any work done is a "work for hire," then it almost cerrtainly is NOT a work for hire, and there is no transfer of copyright from the person taking the pictures to the person paying for the pictures.

 

[Oahu_Sunsets]

Thanks for all the helpful replies

I would love to retake the pictures, unfortunately we've had a drought for the last four months, so things have gone from green and lush to brown with dead stuff in the midground for the ocean view shots (a main selling point).

I'm also looking at many hours of work at the computer to remove and replace photos on a flash website with some tedious detail.

I've reread the "works for hire," and understand that they're likely not characterized that way.

I did call the photographer directly, but he's refusing to sell me the images at the request of the realtor. I don't want to harm his commercial interests with that agency, and he's pretty much of the mind: " whatever the realtor says" is how the photos are copyrighted.

So.. I'm pretty well bleeped, it seems. I did reread the listing contract and have requested the board of realtors mediate our dispute, as my seeming unreasonableness about such a petty issue revolves around the realtor's initial dishonesty about her advertising budget and the corporate policy at her brokerage. She made presentations such that the advertising costs were born by the brokerage, and then later did the bait and switch: stating that the advertising costs were coming out of her personal monies.

I know, it's pretty naive to take people in sales at their word about anything revolving around a hefty commission, but at the least it's a learning experience for a first time home owner/seller.

 

[mmmagique]

If you want to sell your house yourself, you have to do the work.
The pictures have already been paid for, and not by you.
Why in the world would she just walk away and let you have the pictures, after she has done comps for you, advertising for you, paid for pics for you (and advertising), perhaps done walk-throughs for you...
If you want the pics, offer to pay her for them, otherwise, just take your own.