I also told him, BTW, that I don\'t hand over RAW files, ever. I do my own photoshopping, thank you very much. Because I do live that lifestyle, ha.
I think I\'m going to reply with this for starters...
Hi XXXXXXX,
I understand your concerns - I\'ve found that most clients don\'t have a solid understanding of how things work when they first contact me. Rest assured that I\'m not asking for anything that isn\'t standard in the industry.
Out of curiosity, are all the other photographers you work with actual employees? That makes a big difference if they\'re on-staff versus contracted externally.
Licensing and usage fees can get complicated, so to help illustrate, here\'s a quick excerpt from a book entitled \"Pricing Photography: The Complete Guide to Assignment and Stock Prices\"
WORK-FOR-HIRE
An issue that many clients continue to force is that of work-for-hire. Very simply, the Copyright Act of 1976 gives authors limited monopoly power over the work they produce. This means that authors can decide who can use their work, what it will cost to use it, and that no one can reproduce it without the author\'s permission. If copyright protection weren\'t extended to authors, as soon as their work as made public, some unscrupulous operator could freely reproduce the work and make money from the author\'s efforts. The exception to author\'s copyright protection are those cases where work is created by employees. The employer owners the copyright under a principle known as made for hire. The work-for-hire provision was added to the Copyright Act to satisfy publishers who claimed that, because they paid salaries and benefits, they should own the copyright to works created by employees.
