Newspaper was provided the photo by the subject. This happens all the time. Your issue is with your client, not the paper. ...
As I said the paper doesn\'t have much liability here. If anyone is at fault it\'s the client for giving the paper a photo she never had permission to give away.
This is incorrect.
In the US, the publisher of a photo is liable for copyright infringement, and may be able to recover from a submitting party who falsely claims to have rights to the photo. The submitting party (your client) has no liability to you, because she didn\'t publish the photo.
In many cases, simply submitting an invoice to the newspaper will get you paid. The invoice would consist of a claim of ownership (description of the job, a copy of the agreement, etc.), a statement that no rights were solicited or given, and a charge for a reasonable, standard publication rate (i.e., consider the circulation of the newspaper, the location/prominence of the photo in the newspaper, and the size of the photo). It is more likely to succeed if you are very professional, polite, and matter-of-fact, and not in any way accusatory. Do not refer to your client other than to indicate that you took photos, which you still own, for that client. Don\'t talk about the client\'s actions. Just address the newspaper, which has unwittingly established a relationship with you by infringing your copyright.
The newspaper may then attempt to subrogate by recovering the fee from the person who submitted the image, but this is fairly unlikely if the fee is small and/or the submitter didn\'t explicitly agree to indemnify the newspaper.
In the unlikely event that you registered your image collection in the US Copyright Office prior to publication, you have additional options with regard to both the newspaper and the client, but probably the best route is simply to invoice the newspaper in a professional, routine manner.
PM me if you have specific questions about this.
Jun 19, 2012 at 11:42 PM
Previous versions of Ian Ivey's message #10738066 « Newspaper ran a photo without permission »
