Photos on Your Website: Image Rights, Warning Letters and What a Wrong Image Costs

A trade business used eleven photos by a professional photographer on its website. Without a licence. In February 2021 the Hamburg Regional Court ordered it to pay 5,075 euros.

The arithmetic behind it is revealing. The court set a notional licence fee of 270 euros per image for the first year and 135 euros for each of the following four. Because the photographer's name was missing, a 100 percent surcharge was added.

Cases like this aren't rare — they're routine in Germany, where copyright holders enforce rights through formal warning letters called Abmahnungen. And they almost always hit people who believed they'd done nothing wrong.

A caveat first: I'm a developer, not a lawyer. If you've received a warning letter, it belongs with a copyright solicitor, not in a blog post.

Every photo is protected

The most common misconception first: a photo without a copyright notice is free to use.

It isn't. A photograph is automatically protected by copyright the moment it's taken. It doesn't need marking, registering or a © symbol. The protection simply exists.

That applies to an agency's professional shot as much as to a snapshot a friend took on their phone.

"I didn't know" doesn't count

The second misconception has bigger consequences: if you didn't know an image was protected, you're off the hook.

German copyright law has no good-faith acquisition of usage rights. You can't argue you thought the image was free. Appearing in Google image search means nothing. Findable isn't the same as permitted.

The classic infringement is exactly this: an image from search, quickly downloaded, placed on your own site. Usually without any bad intent — and still expensive.

What a wrong image costs

Unauthorised use of an image typically leaves you liable for three things.

Cease and desist. The image has to go, and usually a legally binding undertaking is demanded: a promise never to use it again, backed by a contractual penalty if it happens anyway.

Damages. These are almost always calculated by licence analogy: what would a proper licence have cost? German courts frequently use the recommendations of the photography industry body MFM as a benchmark. The Jena Higher Regional Court, for example, awarded a photographer 17,500 euros for 50 images — 350 euros each.

Legal costs. Whoever used the image without permission bears the cost of the warning letter.

Multiply that across several images over several years and the total can exceed the cost of the entire website.

Crediting the photographer

Here's a trap that catches even people who hold a licence.

Under section 13 of the German Copyright Act, the author has the right to be named as such. Many image sources therefore make a credit a condition of the licence.

If it's missing, that's an infringement in itself — and courts frequently double the damages for it. The Federal Court of Justice confirmed this surcharge in its "Sportwagenfoto" ruling (case I ZR 187/17).

In practice: even a properly licensed image can trigger a warning letter if the credit the licence requires is missing.

Free image sites: free doesn't mean carefree

Unsplash, Pexels, Pixabay — these sites are genuinely useful and fine for many purposes. But "free" isn't the same as "carefree".

Read each platform's licence terms carefully. Not every image may be used for every purpose, in particular not always commercially. And images under a Creative Commons licence come with conditions — such as attribution, or a ban on commercial use.

A practical tip: save proof when you download. A screenshot of the page with the image, the licence and the date. If you're accused of infringement years later, you can show where the image came from and on what terms you received it.

Who's liable if the designer added the image

A point that surprises many: the party responsible to the photographer is the website operator — not the contractor who built it.

If your web designer added images without a licence, the warning letter comes to you. You can then turn to the contractor if they culpably failed to obtain the licences. But you pay first.

So it's worth asking on every project: where do the images come from, and whose name are the licences in? If a licence sits with the contractor, your right to use the image may end when the engagement does. How to settle this upfront is covered in the article on who owns a website.

Your own photos have pitfalls too

Taking your own photos solves the licensing problem — but creates another.

People who are recognisable in a photo have a right to their own image. Under section 22 of Germany's Art Copyright Act (KUG), portraits may in principle only be published with the consent of the person shown.

That covers staff in team photos as much as customers in event pictures. Get consent in writing before a photo goes on the website. For staff, that includes what happens if someone leaves the company.

Despite this hurdle, your own material remains the best choice. Real photos of your work are more credible than any stock image. What to gather before a project is in the article on preparing a website project. The same applies to your Google Business Profile: real, own images rather than someone else's.

Received a warning letter — what now

If it's happened:

Don't ignore it. Failing to respond risks a court injunction. The claim can grow the longer the unauthorised use continues.

Don't sign hastily. The enclosed undertaking is often drawn wider than necessary. A modified version can improve your position considerably — but that's a solicitor's job.

Remove the image immediately. That ends the ongoing infringement without being an admission of guilt.

Have it checked by a lawyer. Not every warning letter is justified, and the amounts demanded are often negotiable.

Staying on the safe side

Where image credits belong and what else must appear in a German legal notice is in the article on Impressum and GDPR.

Frequently asked questions

Can I use an image if there's no copyright symbol on it? No. A photo is automatically protected by copyright the moment it's taken. No notice is needed.

Is an image from Google image search free to use? No. That an image can be found online doesn't mean you may use it. Without a licence, using it is an infringement — even if you didn't know.

What happens if I don't credit the photographer? That's an infringement of section 13 of the German Copyright Act in itself, even with licensed images. Courts frequently double the damages; the Federal Court of Justice confirmed this in its "Sportwagenfoto" ruling.

Are images from Unsplash or Pixabay safe? For many purposes yes, but read the licence terms carefully. Not every image is cleared for every use, and Creative Commons images carry conditions such as attribution.

Who pays if my web designer added the image? The warning letter goes to you as the site operator. You can then pursue the contractor if they culpably failed to obtain the licence — but you pay first.

Can I put photos of my staff on the website? Only with their consent, ideally in writing. Recognisable people have a right to their own image under section 22 KUG.

In short

Every photo is protected, not knowing is no defence, and a missing photographer credit doubles the damages. You're responsible as the operator, even if someone else added the image.

The safest route is your own photos with the consent of anyone shown — or licensed images whose licence you've documented and hold in your own name.