A golf courses right to its own image

[ian]

I went to Toronto Golf (Colt) last week to take photos for Paul Turner. The course was completed in 1912 and historically was interesting to Paul. The club informed me that I could take the photos for myself and "I could share them with Paul," but they may not appear in any publication. Fair enough.

My wife, who negotiates copyright royalties for schools, watched me post the photos from St. Georges. She asked if I had their permission to post the photos. That posting on the web site would be considered "publishing" the photos without permission. I had never given it much thought.

There is no question in my mind, I should have asked the club about the old photos (the images belong to the club) from the clubhouse, and will. The question I have, does a club have a right to stop photos being taken and posted of its holes?

[A_Clay_Man]

Our own, professional photographer and super super, Pete Galea posted awhile back that images taken by the photagrapher are the property of that photographer. Not to say it is not the courses right to not allow you take pics, or to ask you not to publish them. Then it is on your honor to respect thier wishes.

Perhaps the ruling on the miss america pagent fiasco will further define what the court thinks about this subject.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Ian,
Aerial/ground photos of most every course talked about on this site are available on the web for examination and downloading. Re-using photos for monetary gain, if they are copyrighted, requires permission/payment.
Private clubs can ban photo taking at their course.


  

[Peter Galea]

Here is my take on the question.
 
The image belongs to the photographer the instant it is created.
To publish a person's likeness you must have a release.
To publish a lanscape photograph, you need no release, as it is your vision and interpretation of the scene.
You MAY NOT tresspass to get the photo.
If you are a guest of a private club and publish photos of the course without permission, you will most likely not be invited back. It is doubtful that you will be sued over it, unless the photos are defamatory or do harm to their business.

I have some photos of a course under construction that I would like to post, but as a courtesy to those involved I will wait until I get permission.

After thinking about this for a while, there may be special circumstances which would prevent you from publishing for profit with out permission. Specifically, if you were to make post cards, or the like of the 7th at Pebble Beach. I believe they have trademarked the course. You could still publish it on the internet, but they have exclusive rights and license to profit from images of their property.

[Mike Hendren]

Legalities and property rights aside, common courtesy suggests it is innappropriate to post photos of a private course at which one is a guest, regardless of whether one ever desires or expects to return.  

[Mike Hendren]

Legalities and property rights aside, common courtesy suggests it is innappropriate to post photos of a private course at which one is a guest, regardless of whether one ever desires or expects to return.  

[BCrosby]

As a general rule, a club wishing to protect its copyright in images of its property can retain those copyrights if another person is given permisssion to use those images for very limited, private purposes. If, however, that person subsequently "publishes" those images, the copyright of the club may be lost. The person who "published" the images without permission or without protecting the club's copyright may be accountable to the club for damages suffered by reason of the loss of those copyrights.

I do not know whether the foregoig applies to the situation referred to above. I just throw it out as a very rough (and not to be relied upon) summary of copyright law.

So be careful.

Bob  

[ian]

Its not a fun thing to talk about.

The whole reason I wanted to post pictures is that I have access to some really wonderful old photos. I will call the source club each time to get their blessing.

The tougher one is my own photos of holes.

[Lester_Bernham]

Ian
I think you are worrying needlessly , in fact I know a lot of golf clubs who would love their course and the holes discussed and veiwed on this forum .

I hope this doesnt put people of posting their photos as it would be to the detriment of this wonderful site.

Lester

[Paul P]

There are some beautiful pictures on this site http://www.joanndost.com/com/display.asp .
I should note that I have no interest in it and am not trying to sell anything to you. The main reason I post it is the "disclaimer" on the Cypress Point photos. Might add to the discussion.

[Tom Doak]

I took photos at hundreds of courses back when I was traveling around to get my education.  A handful of clubs (Ekwanok, SFGC) asked me to sign a release saying I would never sell the images, so I've contacted those clubs anytime someone wanted something.

For the most part, I don't worry about posting these pictures or even selling them.  For example, many other photographers have taken pictures of Cypress Point and are in the public domain, so if GOLF Magazine thought my image of the course was better, why would the club care which one they used?

BUT, I was never going to sell my photos to make postcards or calendars or playing cards or anything else which would generate a large sum of money.  How would you feel if you were Mike Keiser, and you saw a deck of Bandon Dunes playing cards, with poor quality photographs of the golf course, which were unauthorized and for which you weren't making one dime?

I'm much more careful about that now, because as we all know once a photo makes the Internet, anyone can use it for anything.

[A_Clay_Man]

Am i right to assume that if Pebble beach pictures were published prior to their copyrighting of the course, that their copyright is worthless?


I sure hope so. Their lawyers have aggressively threatend people who even use the name, even though there are other Pebble beaches in this world.