Many families like to take a set of "family photos" before the year, but after happily taking pictures, disputes often arise over the ownership of the negatives. Who exactly does the negative belong to?Recently, the Pinggu Court heard a related case, which explained that the ownership of the negative mainly depends on the contract between the two parties.
Li purchased a 1,000 yuan stored-value card at an event held by the defendant's photography studio, and the contents of the package stated that "all negatives are not included". Since then, Li has ordered two shots for his daughter**. However, after the filming was completed and Li selected the film, the studio was required to provide all the negatives, in this regard, the studio said that according to the contract, "** content includes albums, setting the stage, etc.", and indicated that "not all negatives" are provided, and only the selected ** negatives are provided. The two sides disagreed on the ownership of the negatives, and Li said that Gao was an employee of the photography studio and promised to give away all the negatives. The photography studio did not recognize this, saying that Gao's promise to give away all the negatives was a private transaction between him and Li, and had nothing to do with the photography studio.
During the trial, the court obtained the on-site records of the Market Supervision Bureau, which stated that the law enforcement officers inspected the business premises of the parties, and that there were three computers at the scene that did not find the retrieval information of Li and his daughter except for the negatives in the register.
The court held that Li signed the photographic documents issued by the photography studio, indicating that he knew that the contract contained the content that he would not send all the negatives, and now both parties recognized the negatives selected by Li, and the photography studio had provided them to him, and the photography studio had fulfilled its obligations under the contract. Mr. Li and Mr. Gao privately promised that they could not oppose the validity of the service contract reached between Mr. Li and the photography studio. Moreover, after the on-site inspection by the Market Supervision Bureau, except for the negatives in the register, other negatives could no longer be provided, so the court did not support Li's litigation request for the return of the negatives. After trial, the court of second instance upheld the original judgment.
The judge said that every year, disputes over the ownership and cost of negatives are not uncommon in complaints involving photo studios and photography studios. There are two types of circumstances as to whether the act is illegal:
First, the photo studio or photography studio did not inform consumers in advance that the negatives needed to be charged separately or that the negatives were attributed, and the charges were made afterwards violated the consumer's right to know, and the consumer could complain to the industry and commerce or the consumer association.
The second is that the photo studio or photography studio clearly informed the charge or ownership of the film in advance, and the consumer agreed and signed the contract, in this case it is not infringing.
Therefore, before shooting, you must understand the contract clearly to avoid subsequent disputes.