I actually had an instructor get up in class some 40 years ago to say... "I don't want to see any more photographs of sunsets - You can go out any day of the year and take a picture of a sunset!" I remember those words clearly as they came after the class had been moved over a shot I had just presented. The problem is, sunsets like the one you took don't come along often... and they aren't "trite" Please remove that thought from your mind.

This language is typical of what you find in a legal (template) since there is no way of determining what the relationship between the photographer and client really is - could be commercial, marketing, modeling, portrait, etc. As written, it vests the right of ownership in the photographer. As stated by another, if you are a client getting a portrait made you (client) expect to own what you paid for. If I was getting a portrait of my kids, I would not expect to see them show up on-line or in someone's advertising without my permission. If that was the case, I would either want a reduced fee or some kind of re-numeration if the photos I paid for gained unexpected notoriety. On the other hand, if you are a fashion photographer and are paying for the model's time, then the model may have limited, or no rights to ownership. The legal climate has also become twisted in recent years, that an artisan's ability to work creatively may be limited by the current trends of our social environment. That said, it may be worthwhile to visit an attorney who can take a look at your business plan and re-state your terms in a way that will protect your interests without running off potential clients. Just my thoughts.