I recently had some questions arise by a bride's family regarding what they are permitted to do with photopraphs after their wedding. I found myself having a hard time explaining what the laws are and what common practice is for photographers in a clear and easy to understand manner. So what did I do? I sat down and Googled some questions. The following information was derived from Gwyneth Colleen Photography, who was so generous to give me permission to post.
I offer print releases to ALL of my wedding and portrait clients. But what is a Print Release exactly? And how does it differ from a Copyright Release?
Here are a few points to help clear up any confusion regarding usage.
*Copyright: © rests with whoever took the photo. It doesn’t matter if it was on your camera and is of you, if someone else pressed the shutter, they created the work, and the copyright belongs to that person. this is not a grey area; it’s black and white, and misusing an image (especially for personal gain) CAN be cause for legal action.
*Usage: well, generally, the term is pretty obvious. 
what gets tricky is when you start considering the various ways to use images that you may be in possession of. more on this in a bit.
*Printing Release: clients of mine who purchase the disc of images from their wedding also receive a limited printing release. it allows them to make an unlimited number of prints for personal use. they can make 400 copies of their ceremony kiss and send them to anyone and everyone they know…they can make scrapbooks full of images and give them as gifts to their grandparents, they can make proof prints and give a set to their mothers…as long as they are the only ones using the images for print, and they are not profiting…it’s pretty much all good. (one sticky area other photographers i know have encountered is if someone requests them to design an album with images taken by another photographer, or if clients ask someone else to design an album using images that one of my friends holds the copyright to. because it’s a “derivative work” and they’re paying for someone else’s services, that’s not cool.) i think i’m starting to get sort of weird and technical, so a good philosophy to have is: if it seems weird, ask! i will not mind at all answering an honest question, and if it’s not something i’m comfortable with, i will try to come up with a solution that works for everyone involved!
some photographers DO offer a full rights release…this entitles clients to edit, make derivative works, use the images for a billboard…whatever. if your photographer does not offer this, it’s NOT cool to do any editing or use the images in any way that is not allowed in your release paperwork.
Back to usage: Many people wonder about using images online. i can totally understand this, and for this reason, I include low-res, watermarked images on every disc that anyone purchases. the copyright release states that if images are going to be used online, the client MUST use these low-res, watermarked versions. there are a few reasons for this:
1. It helps me out! your friends see them, (hopefully) love them, and think of me next time they need a photographer
2. Those images are already optimised for use on the web. (without getting too technical and boring you–just trust me. these smaller files will not only upload wayyyyy faster, they will also look waaaayyyy better than any of the larger, unwatermarked files.)
3. We artistic types get a little funny over how our creations are displayed; we put a lot of work into making sure those images look fantastic, and if they’re stretched or scrunched or compressed wrong…they look bad... and if our names are attached to them, WE look bad.
*The PPA website offers some insight on Photography Copyright. To view a brief write up, click here. ----> PPA and Copyright.
I hope this has helped to clear up any gray area regarding print releases and usage. If you have any questions what-so-ever, please do not hesitate to give me a call or email me. Thanks!