Image Licensing Explained: A Behind‑the‑Lens Guide from an Aquatics sports Photographer 🏊♂️🤿📸
- Mickaël Malaper
- Jul 5
- 12 min read
Updated: Jul 6
This blog post is a bit more technical than usual. It’s aimed at organisations looking to work with professional sports photographers, as well as anyone purchasing images from my online galleries. I also hope it helps other photographers who may not be fully familiar with licensing to better understand how it works, so they can price and protect their images appropriately based on their clients’ intended use — and safeguard their work from misuse when needed. Feel free to navigate to the relevant sections below:
Sections:
Introduction
I have spent years chasing the perfect moments to capture in the pool and perfecting my technique since I made the transition behind the lens — whether it’s a water polo player shooting the ball, a swimmer’s explosive dive, or a diver’s graceful entry after a pike.
In the UK every shot I capture is protected by copyright from the instant I press the shutter button, it is automatic and does not need any sort of registration to apply.
When you “buy” one of my images in an online gallery, you are not actually buying the file, what you are buying is a licence to use an image in a specific way based on the use you are intending for it.
As over the years there has been confusion and misunderstandings on this topic, I thought I would write a post as a guide to explain how it works:
1. Why you license my images, not own the files
A very common misconception I come across is the idea that purchasing an image means you fully own it and can do absolutely anything with it. In reality, when you “buy” one of my images, what you are really getting is a licence, meaning: the permission to use the image in a specific way, under set conditions.
To help make sense of this, let me give you an example:
Imagine that you have a fantastic home cinema room big enough to seat 15 people. You buy a popular film for your own enjoyment. But after a while, you decide to start selling tickets and charge people to come watch it in your home cinema.
By doing this, you are breaking the licence agreement you accepted when you bought the film — which was meant strictly for personal, private use, not public or commercial screenings.
The exact same principle applies to my photographs. A personal licence lets you enjoy the image for your own use (such as sharing on your social media or printing it for hanging it on your wall), but it doesn’t allow you to use it commercially, resell it, or reproduce it beyond what is agreed in the licence.
In my case, unless there is a written agreement stating otherwise, I retain copyrights over every photograph I take from the moment I pressed the button to capture it. What you acquire is a licence granting you permission to reproduce or display the photo under agreed terms:
Personal licence: This type of licence is meant for your own private use such as prints or social‑media posts (as long as you are not using it in a post sponsored by a brand). This licence is non‑commercial, and has limited redistribution, it usually is cheaper than the other type of licences as image use is not meant for profit.
Sub-licensing (i.e passing the image files to a third party such as a club, school, a brand, sponsor or any other organisation) the image without written permission constitutes a copyright infringement and will likely incur a fee to yourself and the third party the images were transferred to.
The best if unsure of which type of licence to get based on a specific use, is to reach out to me via email and be sure that the licence type you plan to purchase covers the intended use for your image(s).
Editorial licence: This type of licence is commonly used for newspapers, magazines, blogs or team websites. The pricing for that type of licences is higher than a personal use licence and is defined by reach (local vs national or international), format (print vs digital) and duration (one off or recurring use over a period of time). I do not currently offer this type of licensing in my galleries but will certainly introduce it on a case by case basis upon requests.
Commercial licence: This type of licence is made for adverts, brochures, sponsorship campaigns, marketing material, social media of organisations, website use, or merchandise. The pricing of this licence type is usually coming with a premium as the intended use of images is to generate revenue, it can come with exclusivity clauses (meaning the client would be the only one able to use the images) but this usually means that the fee for the client is higher as I can't sell the rights to those image to another client.
I offer this type of licence for my images but because this use is not a one size fits all, pricing is bespoke and based on the number of image to license, the intended use, the length of usage granted, and the territory of use of the images.
If you are after such type of licence I would always recommend you to contact me via email.
Educational licence: For school or training materials. The rate for these licences will likely be discounted, the licence means the images are used for non‑profit, non‑commercial use but purely educational purposes.
Remember: even when non‑profit organisations (charities included) use professional images in their marketing material, website, or social media to raise awareness (and ultimately funds for their cause). That activity counts as a commercial use, so it still requires a commercial licence.
The pricing of licences varies depending on how the image(s) are intended to be used: print run, broadcast size, region, duration, exclusivity — all of which I spell out in my agreements, licence terms and contracts.
This does not go to say that all licensing of images necessarily comes with a fee, and I myself have licensed images in the past without asking organisations I collaborated with for a fee payable in order to use my images.
In upcoming weeks I will be writing an article with my views on working for free as a sports photographer, keep watching this space for more!
2. UK copyright basics, why it matters
Automatic protection: as I mentioned in my intro, the moment I fire my camera’s shutter, my photos are already protected by law—thanks to the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, there’s no need for registration or red tape; as soon as I press the shutter button of my camera down it’s instantly my copyright, giving me exclusive control over how the images are used.
Economic rights: Under the UK law (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, s.16), as the author, I hold exclusive economic rights in every shot I take: that means only I can copy or reproduce the image, issue or distribute copies (whether for sale or hire), rent or lend it out, show it or play it in public, communicate it to an audience (for example via broadcast or online streaming), or create any adaptations or derivative works—all of which would require my express permission before a third party or client can do them.
Moral rights: I also enjoy moral rights in my photographs: you must always credit me as the creator whenever my image is published or broadcast (the “right of paternity,” s 77), and I have the right to object if my work is treated in a way that’s derogatory or prejudicial to my honour or reputation (the “right of integrity,” s 80). These rights can’t be waived unless we expressly agree in writing, so even when you have secured a licence to use an image, you’re still legally obliged to acknowledge my authorship and to refrain from altering or displaying the photo in a manner that could misrepresent or harm its original intent. The right to a credit forms part of all my contracts and licences for commercial use of my images.
As a client it is good practise in the early stages of your collaboration with a professional photographer to ask them how do they prefer to be credited for their work in publications.
Standard Terms of copyrights: my copyright in each photograph lasts for the duration of my life plus 70 years after my death—meaning I, and then my estate, retain exclusive rights over reproduction, distribution, public display, adaptation and moral rights throughout that period. Once those 70 years expire, the image falls into the public domain, but until then any use beyond a granted licence or assignment requires permission (and potentially a fee) from me or my rights holders.
Assignment vs licence: Even if you were to buy a “buy‑out” licence from me, you’re simply paying for permission to use the image in agreed ways—you still don’t own the underlying copyright.
To actually transfer full ownership (so you could reproduce, modify, sublicense or sell the photo as if you had taken it yourself), we would need a formal assignment under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, in writing and signed by me. Because handing over the copyright strips me of all future control and income from that image or a series of images, assignments are usually rare and come with a significantly higher fee than a more standard type of licence.
3. Common types of licences
Rights‑Managed: I tailor this licence to one clear use — let's say, a six‑month online feature for a national water polo league in the UK — and price it exactly to that scope.
Royalty‑Free: This is when the client pays a single fee, then is free to use the image broadly under agreed terms knowing that I still own the copyright, and the licence isn’t exclusive to a specific client, so the same image(s) can be licensed by others.
Creative Commons / Public Domain: This would almost never apply these to my work in the aquatics. Licensing images and selling rights to reproduce my work is how I make a living out of photography and in some cases my clients want the assurance of exclusivity, proper credit and full control over their high‑impact sports imagery.
4. Licensing vs owning the image
To spell it out simply:
Licence = permission to use ➡️ in line with photographer's terms of use.
Assignment = full transfer of copyright ➡️ the client gets to choose how images are used.
When you licence one of my shots — say, an action shot of yourself swimming butterfly — you gain permission to republish it under agreed terms, but you don’t own the underlying copyright.
If for any reason you need to assign full rights (so you can sub‑license it or alter it indefinitely), we would need to draft a bespoke Intellectual Property transfer contract. That investment will likely be costly as it will reflect the lifetime value of my creative work.
5. How I price my photography licences
When I structure my pricing for licences, I factor in:
Skills & equipment: Professional photography isn’t just about pointing‑and‑shooting — different disciplines or events demand different expertise and kit. For example, an underwater photography session combines specialised free-diving or pool‑side techniques with waterproof housings, high‑power underwater strobes, custom lenses ports on the housing, and precise light‑metering. Those hours I spent honing my skills, bespoke tools and ongoing maintenance all feed into the cost of such a technical shoot.
Running costs: Beyond the shoot itself, there is ongoing investment in camera bodies, lenses, lighting, insurance, continuous development training (learning new techniques and good practises), editing software, website and gallery hosting platforms, plus any travel, accommodation and staff expenses.
Scope of use: What is your intended use for the images, web, print, marketing, brand social media, broadcast or products sales?
Duration: Is it likely to be a one‑off use or a recurring use across multiple platforms?
Territory: Are the images going to be used only locally or will they be used on a global scale sponsor campaign?
Exclusivity: Are the images produced going to be used exclusively by one organisation or will other organisations have the option to license the same images?
Client type: There is a trend with images use, editorial outlets tend to pay less than commercial sponsors, or brands. Local entities such as swimming clubs may not necessarily have big marketing budget so the conversation often starts with how much is their budget. This is a conversation to have with specific clients ahead of the coverage for an event to avoid any surprises.
For instance, a single‑use editorial licence for a feature of one of my underwater image of a famous swimmer might be a few dozen pounds, whereas a six‑month commercial licence for a national swimwear brand campaign could run into the high hundreds if not thousands of pounds.
6. Why full copyright assignment will cost more to the client
Transferring copyright means that the client controls all future uses — reselling, sub‑licensing, adaptations...
Because it strips me of any future revenue and control, assignment fees are set accordingly and usually pretty high as it is an actual transfer of my intellectual property to a client.
My recommendation on that matter if budgetary constraints are present is to go the licensing route over buying copyrights as it covers most needs; assignment is rare and reserved for large‑scale, multi‑territory campaigns where clients need to be sure they have all rights to use the images the way they want.
7. My tips for photographers and clients to prevent misunderstanding and misuse of images
Use clear contracts detailing scope, territory, duration, exclusivity and line of credit required.
Default to licensing your images rather than assignment, giving away your rights to the images should be only when clients need full control of how the images will be used and priced accordingly.
As a photographer before any payment is received make sure to share watermarked proofs to deter unauthorised use. DO NOT send edited images if you have not received payment for your work, this is a recipe for disaster!
Keep records of every licence granted and which images were covered for which type of use. This is very important as this way you can challenge use of images outside of the remit of the licence they were purchased with.
Enforce Your Rights: If someone uses your image without the correct licence, start by sending a clear cease‑and‑desist or licence request — Fortunately many disputes are resolved amicably at this stage. If that fails, consider mediation or Alternative Dispute Resolution (or ADR), then escalate via a formal letter of claim outlining the infringement, your demands, and a deadline by which pictures need to be removed and/or any fee for licence and unauthorised use paid to you. Make sure to capture evidences of the infringement such as screenshots or videos of any unauthorised use of your copyrighted work.
Keep in mind that at this stage even if the culprit of the infringement ends up removing the images, you are still entitled to claim a fee from them for unauthorised use as a compensation!
Should the infringer still not comply and keep using your images, you can pursue court action — often through the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) Small Claims Track for amounts under £10,000 or the IPEC/High Court for larger or complex cases.
Courts can award injunctions to stop misuse, damages or profits, require infringing copies to be surrendered or destroyed, and order legal costs. Criminal prosecution is rare and usually reserved for large‑scale, wilful commercial infringement but this gives you an idea of how things can escalate.
To illustrate this, I recently discovered one of my images from an event I covered in 2024 on a club’s website, mixed in with another photographer’s work — except nobody had actually licensed it even the parents of the swimmers in the photograph.
It turned out someone had simply grabbed a screenshot from my Instagram or Facebook feed and shared it with the club. I emailed them to request either proper licensing or removal. They chose removal... only to come back to me a few days later, when they realised they had already printed the shot on a banner and asked me to license it after all!
We resolved it amicably, and I asked them to pay the commercial licence fee — but I was fully entitled to charge a higher penalty fee for the unauthorised use, especially with the admission of printing work they did not have rights to. I don't think this was done with malice but once again by a lack of understand about image rights and licensing.
This experience reinforces that you, as a photographer, must be your own strongest advocate. Don’t dismiss misuses of your work as “no big deal” or assume there’s nothing you can do as people already have the files. By consistently enforcing your licence terms, you set professional standard, and if you are lenient, word spreads, and your value will erode over time.
For clients, the takeaway is simple: always ask for clear terms of use and accurate pricing based on your intended use of the images. Owning a file doesn’t grant unlimited rights — you need a licence in order to use this file in specific ways, and without one, the photographer can revoke permission and seek fees.
The best safeguard for both sides is a clear, written contract outlining the licence scope, fees, and legal rights. That way, everyone knows exactly what’s covered, and you are less likely to misuse the images that were captured by the photographer you collaborated with.
Finally if you are unsure about using an image captured by the photographer who covered your event, ask them, they will be able to guide you as to which use is authorised with the licence you purchased/agreed with them.
8. Final words
My final tip to fellow photographers: never hesitate to insist on the licensing terms or specific requests your work deserves, whether it’s scope, duration, credit or fees. Protecting your images is protecting your livelihood. Along the way you will meet plenty of clients who aren’t familiar with copyright and licensing, educating them is part of our job as photographers. The more consistent you are in enforcing your terms, the more professional and respected you will appear.
Thanks for sticking with me this far, I hope you’ve found this guide both helpful and enlightening.
Swimmingly, Mickaël!
Comments