Thank you. I'll send them the RAW pictures.

@Ana make sure you reset them to the imported version so do you don't give away your work.

I know nothing about photography. What's the difference between RAW and the processing that you have done, @Ana? What value have you added? If its a lot, it might be worth also sending (separately) one of the edited photos as a sample, offering the rest for sale on your terms. Don't know what the legal implications (ownership) of this is though; the company might try to grab all of that unpaid, too.

@Justin A bit off topic here, but RAW files are basically sensor data packaged in a file. They are are not "developed" into an image viewable by humans and they are not generally transferable. It would be analogous to undeveloped film.

Is certified email a thing in Canada (or the US)? I thought it only existed in Italy, Switzerland and Hong Kong.

@StephenG RAW is one of a few file formats that allows for non-destructive editing. Whereas editing something like a jpeg actually modifies the source file, with RAW you can easily revert, un-do, or step back any editing and processing.

@terdon not sure about certified email, I was thinking of something like Dropbox or other file sharing that would log the download.

"Had you taken the pictures while not on the clock you would be considered the owner" - I don't think this is quite so clear-cut, especially if it was part of something you were asked to do. Even if your existing agreement means they owe some overtime pay (or some other fee).

Friendly reminder that if they are getting lawyers, you should either get a lawyer or comply with their demands. They have the cashflow to sue you to oblivion if they so choose, so if you're going to deny their requests you really need to have legal representation of your own.

@Steve Editing a JPEG is not in and off itself destructive unless you deliberately save over the source file. I'm not aware of any general purpose software that allows writing a file into RAW format after editing.

USPS offers certified mail with return receipt (a green postcard you receive in the mail, showing date and signature of the recipient of your letter; available for domestic and international service). If the Canadian postal service offers similar service, that is what I would recommend for proof of delivery.

@corsiKa - While I agree with your comment as stated ("if they are getting lawyers, you should ..."), if they are only "talking about legal action", then it's up to you to determine whether that's likely to be an empty threat (some people think saying "I'll sue you" is a silver bullet to get anything they want) or whether it is credible that they would get lawyers involved.

@Stobor Absolutely. It would not be the first time someone has threatened to sue and literally never even picked up the phone.

@Steve I'm not 100% certain what "reset them to default imported version" really means. I think it implies that it is a post-procesed RAW file that is exported, not the original files. I actually have a hard time figuring out what that term means.

"a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment". Does not apply here. Also, even if the company has the copyright (which they most likely do not), then why would OP be obliged to hand that over?

@Nelson what I mean in this case is the 'as shot' file produced by the camera

@Dukeling despite being asked to do it, unless she was being paid as an employee then by default she would be the copyright owner. Unless there is a written agreement/contract assigning the copyright to the company that she took the pictures for she would retain the copyright. So in this case she could legally demand payment for use of the pictures and set specific terms for their use.