It is not as simple as a single image in a single room.
It would not be in a single room, but bulk. They would need to replace it in hundreds or maybe thousands of rooms, putting up other art. Then they would need to destroy the hundreds of prints they have, and remove it from the pool of artwork.
It will likely cost several thousand dollars, and they won’t do it without reason. Certainly not just because someone asked.
Cruise ships are an intentional mix of national origins and providers. They are amazing at diffusing responsibility as anything needing liability isn’t just a different company, it is a different company in a different nation subject to different laws. Taxes, employment rights, and anything they don’t want to deal with is a legal maze.
Most likely they don’t even know. One of the many groups involved probably licensed it in bulk, and they do have an agreement paying for use. Very often it is licensed and sublicenced and several levels down somebody submitted the art claiming to have rights they didn’t have. Sometimes people do it to make quick money knowing odds of discovery are low and odds of consequences are even lower. Other times it is merely ignorance, submitting art they like without knowing or caring about money or rights.
You need to figure out exactly what you want. Do you want a license payment? Do you want it removed? Do you want something else?
After you know what you want, if it makes sense to get it, go hire a lawyer. They can help you navigate the tangle of corporate entities and international agreements you will be facing.
It is absolutely your right to demand payment.
Enforcing that right is often expensive, far more costly than money you would receive, and the risks for people on the infringement side very often have near-zero risk, and low cost in the rare case they are caught. Casual infringers don’t think about it, and willful criminals weigh the balance, taking the low risk money.
Delivery terms are an important part of the agreement. The contract should specify exactly how the images are to be delivered. If they’re online, the minimum time should be specified exactly as people are point out. Other times it is a thumb drive included along with the prints.
For online delivery giving notice before they’re gone and keeping an offline copy are commonplace, but not mandatory unless they’re specified in the contract.
The contract is everything. Don’t wing it because you cannot replace or redo a bad contract, and that’s usually only discovered after someone takes the photographer to court; work with a lawyer comfortable in the field to help you make a good one.
You got marketed to, nothing particularly sketchy.
He’s taken photos for friends i know and they said he seemed cool and laid back.
That’s probably how he found your contact information, through friends-of-friends connections on social media.
Your friends vouched for the photographer as legit. Take up the marketing offer or not, the photographer doesn’t care.
Looks like you booked a sitting, not prints.
Many studio and professional environments have a cost for shooting and preparing the images, and then the client reviews them. Then they have a second pass where clients choose which images, if any, they want retouched, edited, and printed for large wall prints, or other formats like wallets.
The business model shrank with the transition to digital, and shrank again with photo printing that anyone can access. Even so, the business model is still around.
Nothing criminal about it, just that you were expecting a different type of transaction. Most studios are very clear up front about the model, that prices are for the sitting and not for prints.