Some thoughts come to mind, but I don't know how all this works. For instance... I would guess that the copyright still belongs to the artist, but that the artist would then be granting either an exclusive or non-exclusive right-to-use to the client, or something along those lines...?
The photographer always owns the copyrights to any images they take UNLESS the tog specifically signs those rights over to the client, which is fairly rare but does happen (often at a premium to the client).
Whenever you are doing anything for a client it is best to have some form of contract so you both know exactly what is required and what the images will be used for. It solves so many issues after the event from happening. I always add a note to the effect informing them that I own the copyright, I don't need to add that as it is a fact but it is better they know exactly whats what from the begining.
You can then license the use of those images to a client for any purpose you wish to license them for, be it printing or email or web or selling on or whatever, but you would still own the copyright as the photographer.
Yeah, rights are granted to the photographer unless stated otherwise. You may consider a model and/or property release, depending upon the nature of your photography and your commercial intents. Make sure everything is negotiated beforehand or you may end up burning a bridge and generating some bad PR for yourself. Do not leave things vague.
In the USA, the photographer owns copyright, unless a work-for-hire agreement is used, or if you are employed as a photographer (or take pictures on company time, for company work).
In Canada, in general, when a client hires a photographer (like a wedding photographer), the copyright goes to the client automatically.
If you don't know for sure, you should speak to a lawyer and find out for sure.
I believe though just like with writing a song you will always retain artistic rights so you can challenge the use if the image owner changes the artistic merit of the work in a way that is not acceptable to you.
"Indian copyright law is governed by THE COPYRIGHT ACT, 1957. The Law of Copyrights in the country was governed by the Copyright Act of 1914. This Act was essentially the extension of the British Copyright Act, 1911 to India.And borrowed extensively from the new Copyright Act of the United Kingdom of 1956.
The Indian Copyright Act today is compliant with most international conventions and treaties in the field of copyrights.India is a member of the Berne Convention of 1886 (as modified at Paris in 1971), the Universal Copyright Convention of 1951 and the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement of 1995.
Though India is not a member of the Rome Convention of 1961, WIPO Copyrights Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT),the Copyright Act is compliant with it.[1]"
