Can I withdraw consent?

[Thankyouforbeingyou]

I'm new here and wondering if anyone can advise on an issue with a photographer? Basically I used his photography services for a big birthday party and at the outset, signed a contract acknowledging he would own all the photos he took and that he would have the right to share them on his website, social media etc. All fairly standard stuff I expect.

However the photographer turned out to be a total nightmare, absolutely loads of issues on the night and afterwards (too long to go into). I complained and eventually dropped the matter but I recently noticed he's uploaded photos of my event (with me in them) onto his website. Of course I signed a contract to say he could do this but knowing what I now know, I'm really uncomfortable with my image being used to pretty much endorse his services.

I am just wondering if (despite him owning the photos) I can still withdraw my consent for photographs of me personally to be used online? I could be wrong but I read somewhere that under GDPR, photos of me are classed as my personal data.

Just wondering if I have any rights here?

If a photo is of you or is of a group including you, the photographer needs your consent to use it. You can withdraw your consent at any time. However, if your image is just an incidental detail in a photo, your consent is not required.

Basically I used his photography services for a big birthday party and at the outset, signed a contract acknowledging he would own all the photos he took and that he would have the right to share them on his website, social media etc. All fairly standard stuff I expect.

There is nothing "standard" in this. Not at all.

YOU are the one paying for it, and you should own everything resulting from the work you paid for.

That is what's pretty "standard" when it comes to copyright. See "copyright on work created while employed". It would be the same if you commission an artist to make a painting of yourself and pay for it - it's yours not the artist's.

In my opinion he was abusing your lack of knowledge. I would put this kind of clauses in the same league as debt collection agencies trying to collect debts that are past statutory limits for enforcement.

If you complained about his "standard clause" to the Information Commissioner's Office I'm not sure they would be favorably impressed by someone trying to get free publicity material from work he was paid to do.

@DaSilvaP This is an old thread. However, it is perfectly standard for a commissioned work that copyright belongs to the person who created the work (the photographer in this instance), not the person who commissioned it. Commissioning someone to do work is not an employment relationship - the person who creates the work is an independent contractor, not an employee. See "Commissioned works" at Ownership of copyright works - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Without going into the fine points of distinguishing the right to be identified as the author of the work and the right to exploit the work, I can tell you for sure that any photographer that I PAY to take pictures at a private event insisting on me signing such clause would be immediately requested to get out my sight - prompto.

That is up to you but, even without such a clause, unless you persuade them to put in a clause assigning copyright to you, the copyright in any photos they take will belong to them. Many will refuse to sign a contract that does not allow them to retain copyright.

Are you by any chance yourself a photographer who's in the habit of splashing all over the internet pictures taken at private events?

I can't see why would anyone else be taking sides with this photographer?

Do you mean prh47bridge? This is a poster who has been around for years and freely shares reliable legal advice, an absolute hero. Fairly sure they're not a dodgy photographer. 😂

As @HirplesWithHaggis says, I am not a photographer. I am not taking sides with this photographer. I am simply explaining the law.

They are a solicitor , so explaining the law.