Hey guys, Andy here. Love them or loathe them, the English rock band Oasis have reformed and have completed the first two dates of their Oasis Live ’25 Tour which takes them around the world, ending in Brazil in November later this year. Full disclosure, I am not a fan and would usually steer away from news of the band; however news from their opening weekend in Cardiff in regards to the Oasis tour photography caught my eye and, like my opinion of them, it was not flattering.
As reported by the Guardian, the band and their management have imposed photographic restrictions on photo agencies and publishers insofar they may use images taken “for one year and then the rights revert back to the band and management.” Additionally, “It is understood that the initial terms proposed were for the right to use images for just one month.”
Firstly, the wording from the Guardian is strange; by saying “revert back” the article suggests the rights to the photography taken by agencies and publishers belongs to the band who hand rights to the agencies and publishers and then take them back. When an author owns the copyright to their work the moment it is created (there are exceptions) this back and forth seems illogical.
At the risk of presumption, it is probably the case that the band’s photography T&Cs, which the agencies and publishers are obliged to sign in order to gain access, state the photographic copyright is transferred to them at the end of 12 calendar months. Thus the rights are legally signed away.
It is important to remember photographic moral rights, which allow owners to take action and protect their work, can not be transferred in the UK. However moral rights must be asserted in writing. In practice, this means when a photograph is sent or transmitted it must be accompanied by a statement that this right has been asserted. At the end of 12 months, when the band own the images, will they, or their management, assert the moral rights of the photographers who took them, if and when the images are used after a year? In simple terms; will the photographers receive credit for their work? I simply do not know.
The music industry has a habit of trying to exert influence in regards to photography; the “three-song rule”, of photographing with no flash from a designated area for only the first three songs, is perhaps the best known example. Other examples include Beyoncé banning all photographers from her ‘Mrs. Carter Show’ world tour in 2013. She hired her own photographer and strictly controlled the release of these images in the hope no unflattering photos would published. This backfired when media outlets purchased low quality and unflattering images taken by her fans with their phones.
As a photographer, it is hard not to view the Oasis tour photography situation via a photographic lens; I attend the concert at my own cost of travel and accommodation (which may or may not be covered by my agency). I have three songs to take a photograph. A year later two brothers, expected the earn £50million each from this tour, own my work for free and I am reliant on them for credit for my work. Honestly I don’t know if I would even bother accepting such an assignment.
As it turns out the News Media Coalition (NMC) which represents a number of UK national newspapers and international photography agencies agrees; they have just announced a photographic boycott of the tour having failed to renegotiate the 12 month handover terms.
We do not know why Oasis tour photography has had the restrictions imposed; with the tour expected to be the most profitable tour in UK history, the band certainly do not seem to need the media to help sell tickets. Maybe the two brothers do not want the photography used out of context? In which case there are T&Cs which may be used to enforce this. Maybe they want to control the images taken of them; in which case they are clearly unaware of how Beyoncé’s effort backfired. Or maybe the two brothers, or their management, simply delight in provocation and generating negative headlines for the sheer sake of it.
andybarnham
I am a portrait photographer based in Cheltenham, UK. Born in Hong Kong to a Chinese mum and British dad, I had an international upbringing while I educated in the UK. I started photography as a hobby while serving as an officer in the British Army.
After my service I turned this passion into a career and became immersed in London's sartorial scene. I am now focusing my camera on portraiture and using this eye for detail which was refined over ten years. As a former Royal Artillery officer it is only fitting I shoot with a Canon camera.
