How UK copyright and design rights apply to product images

What to take away

• Product photography in the UK is governed by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, which gives the photographer first ownership unless a contract says otherwise.
• The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) publishes guidance on ownership and licensing that studios and brands should read before a shoot.
• Licences can be exclusive or non-exclusive, and the duration and territory must be written down.
• Moral rights, including the right to be identified, belong to the photographer and can be waived only in writing.
• Infringement remedies include injunctions, damages, accounts of profits and takedown requests under UK law.
• Contract clauses on image rights should state who owns the files, what licence is granted and how moral rights are handled.

Who owns a product photograph under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 is the core statute for photographs in the UK. It protects original photographs as artistic works. A product photograph qualifies if it is the author's own intellectual creation, which most studio shots are.

Ownership starts with the author. For a photograph, the author is the photographer. That means the photographer or their studio owns the copyright, not the brand that commissioned the shot, unless there is a written agreement to the contrary.

This surprises many ecommerce content leads. They assume that paying the invoice transfers the copyright. It does not. Payment buys a licence, not the underlying right, unless the contract says otherwise.

There is an exception for employees. If a photographer is employed by a company and takes the photograph in the course of that employment, the employer owns the copyright. Freelancers and contractors are not employees for this purpose.

Commissioned work is different. A commission does not transfer copyright by default. The commissioner gets a licence to use the images for the purpose agreed, but the photographer keeps the copyright.

The IPO guidance on ownership and licensing explains these rules in plain terms. It is worth reading before you draft a contract or agree a fee. The IPO is the UK body that handles copyright and design rights policy.

For studios, the practical point is simple. If you want to keep the copyright, say so in writing. If a brand wants to own the images, it must ask for an assignment of copyright, which must also be in writing and signed by the photographer.

An assignment is different from a licence. An assignment transfers ownership. A licence grants permission to use. Many disputes start because the parties used the word "rights" without saying which one they meant.

A written assignment must be signed by or on behalf of the assignor. An oral assignment is not effective for copyright. This is one reason why email trails alone are risky.

If the photographer is a limited company, the company owns the copyright, not the individual who pressed the shutter. Check who the contracting party is. A brand that contracts with a studio contracts with the studio, not the photographer personally.

Joint authorship is possible if two people collaborate on the same photograph. Each joint author then owns a share. Licensing needs the consent of all joint owners, which can complicate ecommerce use.

Databases and compilations of images can attract separate rights, but the individual photographs remain the core asset. Do not assume a gallery or catalogue is protected as a whole if the individual shots are not.

For a brand, the safest route is an assignment or a broad exclusive licence. For a studio, the safest route is a clear non-exclusive licence that leaves ownership with the studio. Both are lawful. The contract decides.

Before you publish images, know the UK rules that apply to product photography, including copyright and advertising standards. That guide covers the wider compliance picture.

Licensing image rights: exclusive, non-exclusive and duration

A licence is permission to use a copyright work. It can be exclusive or non-exclusive. The difference matters for both the brand and the studio.

An exclusive licence gives the licensee rights to the exclusion of everyone else, including the copyright owner. The owner cannot use the work themselves during the licence period. Exclusive licensees can sue for infringement in their own name.

A non-exclusive licence allows the owner to license the same work to others. Most product photography licences are non-exclusive. A studio can shoot similar products for competing brands, subject to any exclusivity clause.

Duration is a key term. A licence can run for a fixed period, for the life of the copyright, or until a project ends. If no duration is stated, a court may imply a reasonable period, which is uncertain.

Territory matters too. A licence for the UK only will not cover sales in the EU or the US. Ecommerce is global, so brands often need worldwide rights. Say so if you need them.

Media and purpose should be defined. A licence for a brand's own website may not cover paid social, marketplaces or print catalogues. Each use should be listed or covered by a broad clause.

Exclusivity can be limited by product category or channel. A brand might ask for exclusive rights to a specific product line, while the studio keeps rights to other work. This is common in fashion and consumer goods.

Royalties are optional. Many UK product shoots are bought outright with a one-off fee. Others use a licence fee plus royalties. The contract should state which model applies and when payment falls due.

Sublicensing should be addressed. If a brand wants to allow a retailer or agency to use the images, the licence must permit sublicensing. Otherwise the brand is in breach by passing the files on.

Termination and revocation should be covered. A licence can be terminated for breach, insolvency or non-payment. The contract should say what happens to existing uses after termination.

Moral rights cannot be licensed in the same way. They can be waived, but a licence of economic rights does not waive them. Keep the two concepts separate in drafting.

For studios, a clear licence schedule prevents scope creep. For brands, it prevents a nasty surprise when a campaign expands. The licence is the commercial heart of the deal.

Check these product photography commercial contracts before you sign, because licence terms are where most disputes begin. A short review can save a lot of money.

Moral rights and the right to be identified as the photographer

Moral rights are separate from copyright. They protect the photographer's personal connection to the work. In the UK they are set out in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

The main moral rights are the right to be identified as the author, the right to object to derogatory treatment, and the right against false attribution. The right to privacy of certain photographs also exists.

The right to be identified must be asserted in writing. A photographer who does not assert it may lose the ability to enforce it. This is a common trap in freelance contracts.

The right to object to derogatory treatment covers alterations that harm the photographer's reputation. Cropping, recolouring or compositing a product image can cross the line if it is done badly.

Moral rights last for the life of the photographer plus 70 years. They pass to the estate on death. They cannot be assigned, but they can be waived.

A waiver must be in writing and signed by the photographer. Blanket waivers are common in agency contracts. A studio should think carefully before signing one.

Brands often want a waiver so they can edit images freely. That is a legitimate commercial aim. The waiver should be clear about what is covered and what is not.

If a brand uses a photographer's image without credit, and the right has been asserted, that can be a moral rights infringement. Remedies can include damages and an injunction.

Derogatory treatment claims are rarer but real. A product image used in a way that suggests the photographer endorses a misleading claim could trigger one.

Moral rights sit alongside the ASA and CAP Code rules on misleading imagery. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) publishes Rulings - ASA | CAP that show how visual claims are policed in practice.

For studios, the practical step is to assert moral rights in every contract. For brands, the practical step is to agree a narrow waiver if you need one. Do not leave it to chance.

Design rights and trade marks in branded product imagery

Product images often show branded goods. That brings design rights and trade marks into play. The photographer may own the copyright in the photograph, but the brand owns the trade mark in the product.

Registered design rights protect the appearance of a product. They can be infringed by images that reproduce the design in a way that confuses or copies. Unregistered design rights also exist for some products.

Trade marks are protected by the Trade Marks Act 1994. Using a brand's logo or distinctive shape in a product image without permission can infringe if it suggests a connection that does not exist.

The Trade Marks Act 1994 is the key statute here. It allows brand owners to stop unauthorised use of identical or similar marks in the course of trade.

A product photographer who shoots a branded item for a retailer usually has an implied licence from the retailer. But that licence may not cover paid ads or third-party marketplaces.

If a brand commissions a shoot, the brand can license its own trade marks to the photographer for the purpose of the shoot. That should be in the contract.

Design rights can also protect packaging. A photograph of packaging may reproduce protected features. The brand's permission is needed for commercial use.

Counterfeit goods create a special problem. Shooting a fake product for a marketplace listing can infringe the genuine brand's rights. Brands should verify stock before a shoot.

Comparative advertising has its own rules. A competitor's product can be shown in some circumstances, but the use must be honest and not misleading. The CAP Code and the Business Protection from Misleading Marketing Regulations apply.

The UK government's business support pages cover Business innovation, protection and cyber security - GOV.UK, which is a useful starting point for digital asset workflows and IP protection.

For ecommerce content leads, the lesson is to clear trade mark and design rights before publishing. A beautiful product image can still be an infringement if the underlying rights are not cleared.

Infringement, takedowns and remedies for copied product images

Infringement happens when someone uses a copyright work without a licence or an exception. Copying a product image from a website and using it in a listing is the classic example.

Primary infringement covers copying, issuing copies to the public, communicating the work online and adapting it. Secondary infringement covers dealing in infringing copies, such as selling or importing them.

A claim can be brought by the copyright owner or an exclusive licensee. Non-exclusive licensees generally cannot sue in their own name.

Remedies include injunctions, damages, accounts of profits, delivery up and costs. Damages can be based on the licence fee that would have been paid, or on the infringer's profits.

Additional damages can be awarded for flagrant infringement. This is where the infringer knew or had reason to know they were infringing.

Criminal offences exist for commercial-scale infringement. These are prosecuted by the Crown. Most ecommerce disputes are civil, but the criminal route exists.

Takedown notices are the practical first step. Platforms such as marketplaces and social networks have notice-and-takedown procedures. A clear notice with evidence usually works.

A takedown notice should identify the work, the infringing use, the rights holder and the legal basis. It should also state that the information is accurate. False claims can expose the sender to liability.

Letter before action is the next step. A solicitor's letter often resolves the matter without court. It should set out the claim, the remedy sought and a deadline.

Court proceedings are the last resort. The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) handles smaller IP claims in England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own court structures.

Evidence matters. Keep the original files, the contract, the licence and the metadata. A photographer who cannot prove authorship may struggle to enforce.

For brands, the risk is using images without a licence. For studios, the risk is failing to police unauthorised use. Both should have a takedown process ready.

Which product photography UK regulations apply to ecommerce images? That guide covers the regulatory side, including advertising and consumer law.

Contract clauses that keep image rights with the brand or the studio

A good contract decides ownership, licence, moral rights and payment. Without one, the law fills the gaps in ways that may not suit either party.

The ownership clause should state who owns the copyright. If the brand wants ownership, it needs an assignment. If the studio keeps it, the clause should say so clearly.

The licence clause should cover exclusivity, territory, duration, media and sublicensing. It should also state the fee and when it is payable.

The moral rights clause should say whether the photographer asserts or waives the right to be identified. A waiver should be specific and signed.

The delivery clause should cover file formats, resolution, metadata and storage. It should also say who holds the raw files and for how long.

The payment clause should cover deposits, milestones and late payment interest. Under UK law, late payment interest can be claimed under the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998.

The termination clause should say what happens to licences on breach or insolvency. It should also cover the return or deletion of files.

The warranty clause should confirm that the photographer has the right to grant the licence and that the images do not infringe third-party rights.

The indemnity clause should allocate risk if a third party claims infringement. Brands often ask for an indemnity from the studio. Studios should resist unlimited indemnities.

The governing law and jurisdiction clause should name England and Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland. Cross-border shoots need this.

The VAT clause should state whether fees are inclusive or exclusive of VAT. HMRC rules apply, and Making Tax Digital affects digital records.

A well-drafted contract also helps with product photography service standards, because it sets the baseline for delivery and quality. Standards are easier to enforce when they are written down.

A rights checklist before a UK product shoot begins

Use this checklist before any UK product shoot. It covers the main rights issues and helps avoid disputes later.

• Confirm who owns the copyright in the photographs, and put it in writing.
• Agree whether the deal is an assignment or a licence, and sign the right document.
• State the licence scope: exclusive or non-exclusive, territory, duration, media and sublicensing.
• Decide how moral rights are handled, including the right to be identified.
• Clear any trade marks, design rights or packaging rights shown in the images.
• Agree fees, payment terms, VAT and late payment interest.
• Set a takedown process for unauthorised use after publication.

Worked example: a Midlands ecommerce brand

A West Midlands homeware brand commissions a Birmingham studio for 40 product shots. The studio keeps copyright and grants a non-exclusive UK licence for the brand's website and social channels for three years.

The brand asks for exclusivity. The studio agrees to exclude competing homeware brands in the UK for 12 months, for an extra fee. The contract records this.

The photographer asserts the right to be identified. The brand asks for a waiver for paid ads, where credit is impractical. The waiver is limited to paid ads and signed.

The brand confirms it owns the trade marks on the products. The studio checks that no third-party designs are shown. The shoot goes ahead.

Six months later, a marketplace seller copies the images. The brand sends a takedown notice. The studio, as copyright owner, supports the claim. The listing is removed.

This example shows why the contract matters. Without it, the brand might not have had standing to act, and the studio might not have been able to help.

Numbered steps to secure rights

1. Identify the rights involved: copyright, moral rights, design rights and trade marks.
2. Decide who should own each right and what licence is needed.
3. Draft the contract clauses and sign them before the shoot.
4. Record the licence terms in a schedule and keep a copy with the files.
5. Monitor use after publication and act on infringement quickly.

Common questions

Who owns the copyright in a product photograph in the UK? The photographer or their studio owns it by default under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, unless the photographer is an employee or the copyright has been assigned in writing.

Do I need a written contract for a product photography shoot? Yes, in practice. A written contract is needed to assign copyright, to waive moral rights and to set out the licence terms clearly. Oral agreements are hard to enforce.

Can a brand use product images without a licence? No. Using images without a licence or an exception infringes copyright. The brand needs a licence from the copyright owner, or an assignment of the copyright.

What are moral rights in photography? They are the photographer's personal rights, including the right to be identified and to object to derogatory treatment. They last for life plus 70 years and can be waived in writing.

How do I stop someone copying my product images? Send a takedown notice to the platform, then a letter before action if needed. Court remedies include injunctions, damages and accounts of profits.

Do trade marks affect product photography? Yes. Showing branded products can engage trade mark and design rights. Clear permission from the brand before publishing commercial images.