Posted by John Tobias on September 21, 2009 at 9:54 AM
I recently was contacted about the use of zoo animal photographs in a childrens book. I did not have a good answer for the photograher. I have always use public or private zoo as a defining point. If the zoo is a public zoo, run by a government agency, city, county or state I have operated on the principal that the photos are yours to use as you want. IF however, the zoo is a private one, run by a society, foundation or individual then permission is needed to use the photos in commerical ways, including a book if the photos can be indentified to where they were taken. Of course there is a grey area where you have a zoo owned by a public agency, but operated by a private ngo. Of course straight commerical shoots in a zoo are another situation and the zoo should be compensated for staff time or other assistance they have provided. I was wanting to know other photographers experience in this area.
John,
I regularly photograph in the Detroit Zoo, and in their information they have stated that a commercial photograph that is being sold must compensate the zoo for use of the images. My only question would be how do you identify where the animal was photographed? Unless you are bringing in a production company (which may require their permission to do) the number of photographers in the zoo at any one time is usually so great that they would really have no way of knowing who is using the pictures commercially. Just don't show any buildings, signs or other items that would indicate where you are shooting. I already pay enough money through my taxes and zoo memberships in my opinion that unless there is special considerations being given to me or permissions granted for some special shoot, I don't feel compelled to pay them. Not giving you legal advice, just my opinion.
Posted by John Tobias on September 21, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Jeff, thank you for your reply. I probably should state that I have recently retired after 32+years in the zoo field, the last 17 as the director of the Miller Park Zoo, in Bloomington, IL. I have just recently joined NPN and find it very stimulating. I have also read that animals themselves have no property rights, so the question of use gets even more confusing. From my standpoint any time a zoo photo is used and the zoo is ID, the zoo profits from the free exposure. At Miller Park, a public zoo as long as staff was not involved and the photographer staid in the public area they were free to shoot and use however they wanted.
Posted by Bruce Palla on September 21, 2009 at 2:55 PM
I'm heading down to Texas in November and the fine folks at the Central States Forum recommended going to the Ft. Worth Zoo. I opened their site for directions and info and found this:
By entering the Fort Worth Zoo, all guests, patrons, employees and volunteers agree that
photographs and videos of animals and other property at the Fort Worth Zoo may not be
used for commercial profit (i.e., financial gain), for publicity, or for any other purpose
that commercially or publicly exploits the photos and videos, including posting the
images on the Internet.
So, I guess I won't be posting anything in the fauna gallery come December.
I suppose if there aren't any signs or buildings in the shot, one could circumvent this policy, but as I get older, I'm more apt to stay clear of controversy.
Our policy in Denver is similar to Fort Worth (only use them in a non-commercial way although I believe we allow you to post them on the internet, etc). We were a city zoo and became foundation run about 7 - 8 years ago. To my knowledge our policy has always been the same.
To my knowledge we (as an institution) have never gone after anyone that uses our images and we get scores of people with super-telephoto lens who you suspect are using them in a portfolio somewhere.
I doubt we’d bother with images that we couldn’t definitely prove were ours – but you’d be surprised what you can recognize when you work with animals for many years. Our policy is probably in place to stop people producing “Castor the Dragon" T-Shirts and “Klondike and Snow” mugs that might compete directly with our gift-store merchandise.
Unfortunately our zoo is seeing more and more photographers who aren't considerate with their tripods. I actually got some sass-back from a trio when I asked that they allow other patrons (children) to see the exhibits they had been monopolizing with photography.
Posted by John Tobias on September 22, 2009 at 3:43 PM
Dear Aleksei,
My zoo career started at Denver in 1976. I was last there two years ago. This is an interesting question and it was a friend of my sister who lives in Colorado who raised the question of using Denver Zoo photos in a book he was preparing for children. I doubt if there is a good legal answer to this question w/o someone going to court. I agree that zoos can restrict commerical use on site, but where do you draw the line for those who take some photos and year or so latter decided to use them in a book or to illustrate a magazine article?
Do the same restrictions apply to an artist who enters a zoo, then uses images of the zoo's animals for works of art? In my zoo photograhy classes I always make it a point to let participants know that just because they have a camera/tripod they have no more rights in the zoo than other patrons. Unless of course they have made arrangements with the zoo.
It is an interesting situation. Thanks for replying.
Posted by Bill Stice on September 22, 2009 at 5:02 PM
John, I would get some legal advice on the definition of commercial use. I usually see uses in books and magazines defined as documentary or journalistic use unless it is on the cover (which can be interpreted as advertising). I'm assuming you aren't using the images to advertise products but simply displaying the images as examples.
If you'd like I can always ask some discrete questions here. Too many questions and you start raising flags. I, personally, don't use any images I take at the zoo in my "professional" portfolio for fear of a conflict of interest, even if I take them on my weekend.
My zoo ( Lowery Park Zoo Tampa} is nonprofit zoo so they ask that you just give back in some way, either by giving them photos to use or some kind of money donation. Makes sense to me
Posted by Liz Masoner on September 27, 2009 at 11:31 AM
I understand zoos not wanting items to compete directly with the gift shop and most zoos I've gone to have a relaxed policy situation overall. A few zoos and aquariums are going "off the deep end" however. I was told about a year ago by the Atlanta Aquarium that if I wanted to take a photo for use in an online article (200px wide) about aquarium photography in which I would like to their site, it would cost me about $500 minimum to do the shoot. I wasn't asking for any special privileges or anything, I just wanted to be courteous by letting them know I was coming - I wasn't even planning on using a tripod or flash at all. I would have blended in to the rest of the tourists completely. Needless to say I wound up using a photo from another aquarium, the TN Aquarium, who was extremely nice about my request and happy for the publicity. They even offered me free passes to come take photos.
Discussion
9 repliesI regularly photograph in the Detroit Zoo, and in their information they have stated that a commercial photograph that is being sold must compensate the zoo for use of the images. My only question would be how do you identify where the animal was photographed? Unless you are bringing in a production company (which may require their permission to do) the number of photographers in the zoo at any one time is usually so great that they would really have no way of knowing who is using the pictures commercially. Just don't show any buildings, signs or other items that would indicate where you are shooting. I already pay enough money through my taxes and zoo memberships in my opinion that unless there is special considerations being given to me or permissions granted for some special shoot, I don't feel compelled to pay them. Not giving you legal advice, just my opinion.
By entering the Fort Worth Zoo, all guests, patrons, employees and volunteers agree that
photographs and videos of animals and other property at the Fort Worth Zoo may not be
used for commercial profit (i.e., financial gain), for publicity, or for any other purpose
that commercially or publicly exploits the photos and videos, including posting the
images on the Internet.
So, I guess I won't be posting anything in the fauna gallery come December.
I suppose if there aren't any signs or buildings in the shot, one could circumvent this policy, but as I get older, I'm more apt to stay clear of controversy.
Our policy in Denver is similar to Fort Worth (only use them in a non-commercial way although I believe we allow you to post them on the internet, etc). We were a city zoo and became foundation run about 7 - 8 years ago. To my knowledge our policy has always been the same.
To my knowledge we (as an institution) have never gone after anyone that uses our images and we get scores of people with super-telephoto lens who you suspect are using them in a portfolio somewhere.
I doubt we’d bother with images that we couldn’t definitely prove were ours – but you’d be surprised what you can recognize when you work with animals for many years. Our policy is probably in place to stop people producing “Castor the Dragon" T-Shirts and “Klondike and Snow” mugs that might compete directly with our gift-store merchandise.
Unfortunately our zoo is seeing more and more photographers who aren't considerate with their tripods. I actually got some sass-back from a trio when I asked that they allow other patrons (children) to see the exhibits they had been monopolizing with photography.
My zoo career started at Denver in 1976. I was last there two years ago. This is an interesting question and it was a friend of my sister who lives in Colorado who raised the question of using Denver Zoo photos in a book he was preparing for children. I doubt if there is a good legal answer to this question w/o someone going to court. I agree that zoos can restrict commerical use on site, but where do you draw the line for those who take some photos and year or so latter decided to use them in a book or to illustrate a magazine article?
Do the same restrictions apply to an artist who enters a zoo, then uses images of the zoo's animals for works of art? In my zoo photograhy classes I always make it a point to let participants know that just because they have a camera/tripod they have no more rights in the zoo than other patrons. Unless of course they have made arrangements with the zoo.
It is an interesting situation. Thanks for replying.
If you'd like I can always ask some discrete questions here. Too many questions and you start raising flags. I, personally, don't use any images I take at the zoo in my "professional" portfolio for fear of a conflict of interest, even if I take them on my weekend.