Mark,

Are you applying the rights usage to retail?
(ie: Family imaging)

Or to commercial imaging?

I don’t follow your question.

Are you applying usage rights to family photography?

Or to licensing of images for commercial use?

No response.

I asked for clarification, Mark so I can make a more direct comment without making assumptions.

The difference between family (wedding) photography and commercial (or fine art) photography is often apples to oranges.

1) Both sectors may have concerns that image representations may be copied by other image makers.

2) But the threat of actual images being stolen and used in their own respective sectors is quite different.

Let’s compare.
With regard to the second concern. In family photography how will an image be stolen and misused by a retail couple? Will they DL the proof image from a preview gallery? Will they scan their printed proofs or finished images? In either cases, what will their end (unauthorized) use be? FB profile? Make more copies for friends and family? How would the originating studio handle these unauthorized uses? Did the studio file a copyright registration on the images before publishing or delivery? If not, there is little that can be accomplished in court.

But even if the studio enforced it’s copyrights against a family or couple, they may end up with (perceived) negative PR within the community the work.
The battle may be won at the cost of the war.

Of course another studio might copy their work too.
Again, did the studio file a copyright registration on the images before publishing?
If not, there is little that can be accomplished in court.
But there are several other considerations today too.
Even if a copyright registration was filed the image may be so common that a copyright claim is null. As an illustration, I’ll use the very well known “Yosemite Tunnel View”. It is a picture perfect location as one enters Yosemite Valley. I can’t begin to guess how many shutters have fallen on this scene, but I’d guess it to be a billion or more. The image is so common there is nothing to protect with a copyright. Many wedding/family images may fit this situation too.

But today there are so many treatments done to images through actions and plug-ins (which in themselves are borrowed) that the commonness of these looks may also be beyond copyright. For many the most unique aspect of their images may be these (common) digital treatments – of which they do not hold copyrights.

The second concern with regard to the commercial sector would come from (RP) images purchased for one stock use, then used for another (broader) use. Or scanned out of a publication. Most commercial photographer register work, as do licensing companies (Getty, Corbis, etc.).
If the images are used commercial with authorization they are liable for suit or settlement.

Wedding/family images being used without authorization for commercial use.
Did the studio file a copyright registration on the images before publishing or delivery?
How did the thief get a hires copy of the image(s) to use commercially?
Both these question will help decide how to proceed.

With regard to the first consideration.
Much of what I’ve already suggested above is applicable here too.
Did the studio file a copyright registration on the images before publishing or delivery?
Is the image unique enough to be protected by copyrights?

Your thoughts are welcome.

Scott I didn’t reply because I still wasn’t clear. I was not applying a difference. Only stating that we should try to educate EVERYONE. I don’t think you should file suit against grandma but it doesn’t hurt to let people know what the law actually is.