Who actually owns the photographs taken at your event? Discover the dramatic difference between private wedding photography and commercial shoots at event venues, and how copyright law protects photographers, venue owners, and clients.

Introduction: The Hidden Trap of the Photography World

• Many of us are certain that if we paid handsomely for the services of a professional photographer, or if we are the registered owners of a beautifully designed event venue—the photographs taken on the premises automatically belong to us.
• In Israel’s legal reality, this is a widespread and very costly mistake. The Copyright Act establishes that a photograph is considered a protected “artistic work” under law, and it grants ownership in entirely different ways depending on the nature of the event—whether it is a private, family occasion or a commercial shoot.
• To bring clarity and prevent unnecessary heartache and legal claims, we have compiled everything you need to know about the allocation of rights in photographs taken at event venues and hospitality facilities.

The Basic Rule: The Creator Is the Owner (Even If It’s Your Venue!)

• The Copyright Act establishes a clear rule: The first owner of copyright in a photograph is the photographer himself—that is, the physical person who performed the act of photography, chose the angle, lighting, and artistic composition.
• Physical ownership does not equal intellectual ownership: Event venue and hall owners tend to assume that because the facility, the designer furniture, and the decorative corners belong to them, they have an automatic right to use photographs taken on their premises.
• What did the court rule? In the case of Amir Avrishamtzi v. Yitzhak Falaiev, it was clarified that professional photography of an event hall’s facade belongs to the photographer who documented it. The court ruled that the hall owners cannot make commercial use of the image without express permission from the photographer, and that physical ownership of a property does not confer copyright in photographs of it.

The Central Distinction: Private Event versus Commercial Production

The Copyright Act creates a dramatic and critically important separation between two types of productions that take place at event venues:

Private and Family Events (weddings, bar mitzvahs, marriage proposals)

• The statutory default rule (Section 35(b)): When a work is commissioned for a family or private event (such as couple photography for weddings or marriage proposals), the law provides that the first owner of copyright is the commissioning party (that is—the couple or the celebrants), unless otherwise agreed in writing between them and the photographer.
• The importance of a written agreement: The courts apply this rule rigorously. In the judgment Tzur Lisbona v. Roy Peretz, it was held that photographs of a private marriage proposal belong entirely to the couple and not to the photographer who documented them, and the photographer has only a limited license to display them in his portfolio.
• Dismissal of photographers’ claims in the absence of a contract: In the case of Yadin Hasson v. Ohad Eitan Nuri, the financial claim of wedding photographers against a bridal salon that posted photographs of a bride on Instagram was dismissed, because the photographers did not present a written contract with the couple proving that ownership remained with them, and therefore copyright belonged to the couple.
• Important exception for spontaneous situations: The protection of a private event applies only when there is a personal commission for a predefined event. In the case of Keiki Kfar Blum v. Tzuk Manara, the court clarified that a random, spontaneous photograph taken at a tourist site is not considered a “commissioned private event photograph,” and copyright in it remains with the photographing party (or their employer).

Commercial Productions and Shoots (catalog photography, PR, films, and features)

• The statutory default rule (Section 35(a)): In complete contrast to private events, when a commissioned photograph is of a commercial nature (such as photographing furniture at the event venue, fashion shoots, or journalistic feature photography), initial ownership of copyright remains with the photographer.
• The obligation to formalize this in writing: If the commissioning party of the commercial work wants ownership of the images to transfer to them, they must anchor this in a written and signed agreement.
• In the judgment Asaf Ronen v. David Azoulay, it was held that copyright in commercial photographs of meat cuts remained with the photographer, since no contract was signed to transfer the rights, and the commercial user was ordered to pay substantial damages for use without authorization.

The Moral Right: The Photographer’s Perpetual Right to Receive Credit

• What is a moral right? Alongside the economic right to use an image, there exists a powerful legal concept called the “moral right.” This right is grounded in the notion that the work is part of the creator’s personality and soul.
• The right to receive credit (right of attribution): The law provides that the creator of a work has an absolute right to have their name associated with their creation in an appropriate manner and form.
• It cannot be transferred: Unlike economic rights, which can be sold, the moral right always remains with the original photographer.
• What did the Supreme Court rule? In the judgment Ephraim Sharir v. Nirit Zera’im Ltd., the Supreme Court unequivocally held that even if there is an industry practice not to give credit to photographers in commercial advertisements, that practice does not override the law, and the photographer must be given proper and respectful credit.
• The practical implication: Even if the event venue or client has received a lawful right to use the photographs, they must ensure clear credit is given to the photographer who took them, or they risk a financial claim for violation of the moral right.

How to Prevent Claims? A Golden Guide for Event Venue Owners and Producers

To protect your facility and ensure full control over what takes place there, it is recommended to implement the following steps:

• Require a signed “Location Agreement” in advance: Do not allow any commercial entity to enter and photograph on the premises without a signed contract regulating the rights in the outputs.
• Secure your branding and credit: Define in the contract that the venue is entitled to accurate and full credit in any publication of the photographs (for example: “Photographed at the Galilee Culinary Excellence School” and not under generic and misleading names).
• Demand a mutual royalty-free usage license: Stipulate in the contract that while the client remains the owner of the photographs, they grant the event venue an unlimited, royalty-free license to use the photographs for marketing and public relations purposes of the venue.
• Protect the property and require insurance: Ensure that the agreement includes an obligation to deposit a security deposit for physical damage to designer furniture and landscaping, as well as an obligation to present a valid third-party liability insurance policy with a waiver of subrogation rights (recourse claim) by the insurance company against you.

This article was written and prepared for general informational purposes only by Cantor & Co. Law Firm and Notaries and does not constitute a substitute for individual legal advice.