| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/15/2004 03:50:43 PM · #1 |
So, what is the deal with model releases? At what point is one necesary?
Studio photography obviously needs one but what about Street photography?
I'm guessing that when photographer get a snap of a celebrity drunkenly staggering out of a club, they don't ask the celeb to sign a release.
On the same subject, if someone takes part in a carnival, a very public event, is a release necesary???? |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 03:53:07 PM · #2 |
If you plan on selling your images, model releases are necessary if you don't want to be seen in court.
|
|
|
|
08/15/2004 05:01:11 PM · #3 |
| If you conduct a search on the forums using "Model release" you'll get over a page full of threads, most of which deal with this topic, and several of which contain links or text for forms, in addition to opinions on when they are necessary. |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 09:52:49 AM · #4 |
Thanks but none of the threads I've read seem to cover it.
a) I am in UK, most of the threads are based on US law.
b) How are photographers able to sell images of celebrities without their permission? Eg shots in the street.
c) If I take photographs of people taking part in a carnival, in the public street, can I get them published in the paper if I DON'T get paid for them, how about if I DO get paid for them.
d) What about buildings, if I take a picture from the street can I sell pics of it??? |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 10:06:30 AM · #5 |
I can only speak to US law but based on what I've read and the case law I've seen quoted:
A) no idea
B) photos of newsworthy subjects get an editorial protection that extends to usage of them in certain media outlets (newspapers, TV, periodicals, tabloids, etc). it can be argued that someone who's living depends on their public persona can be newsworthy no matter what he/she does as long as its on public property.
C) you can take photos of people doing anything as long as you are on public property (in the US) but you cannot make profit from someone else's recognizable image without giving him/her due compensation. In the US its called "fair use". If that person does not want his/her recognizable image to be used then you will have a legal battle on your hands and in the US the subject of the photo probably has the preponderance of the law on his/her side. Now, if you add motion blur so that an objective viewer cannot tell who the subject is, then you can market your shot anyway you want (you can use similar techniques to keep individuals from being recognizable). the US upholds the rights of the individual to maintain marketable rights to his/her image (obviously as long as you don't say that a celebrity endorses some particular product you could take photos him/her in a public setting and if someone found it newsworthy then you could sell it to a media outlet but not as just a photo of the subject as I understand what I've read).
D) Believe it or not private property is covered under similar laws in the US. You must get a property release form to photograph and market landmarks or even just buildings or even animals (as they are considered property in the US).
Sounds weird but that's what I understand of the US law. You can take any image (as long as you're on public property and you don't "endanger" others or infract a federal law) but you cannot market the photos without release forms.
I hope you get more info regarding the UK as I'd like to see some of that info.
Kev
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 10:32:59 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by cbonsall:
a) I am in UK, most of the threads are based on US law.
|
Yeah, but i would guess that they are not widely different.
Originally posted by cbonsall:
b) How are photographers able to sell images of celebrities without their permission? Eg shots in the street.
|
As far as I am aware, you can take a photo of anyone and use it for profit etc so long as it doesn't show that person endorsing anything or show them in a bad light or to insinuate they are something they are not.
I.e if I took a photo of you drinking a can of coke in London somewhere I could probably sell that image to a publisher who wanted a person on the streets of London to go with some text about London Life etc.
If coca cola wanted to use that image in their next magazine advert, that would be a big no no.
Likewise if it was used on a booklet describing the use of drug abuse that would give you cause and ground to complain or seek damages.
Originally posted by cbonsall:
c) If I take photographs of people taking part in a carnival, in the public street, can I get them published in the paper if I DON'T get paid for them, how about if I DO get paid for them.
|
Again yes because you would simply be reporting on an event and they are in a public place etc etc - again you couldn't use the images alongside an article on how stupid people are that dress up in sill costumes and prance around like a lordy lord.
To use images for profit wherever you want, I try to blur out the person or take them from behind (oops). This is one example of how I do that for business stock images etc: Business Man
Originally posted by cbonsall:
d) What about buildings, if I take a picture from the street can I sell pics of it??? |
This is one area I am sure about - you must eb very careful when using images of buildings as these can contain very serious copy-writes.
In London for example, you can't use pictures for profit of the Gherkin, City hall or any images of any building in Canary Wharf! That is unless you seek permission from the copyright holder (The Architect of the Gherkin for example)
And if you ask they generally say no (in my experience)
Buildings I mentioned:
City hall
Canary Wharf
Gherkin
Llyods Building
However, I am sure you are free to sell them as stock images which is legal, and then it's up to the company whom purchased the images to seek the copyright clearance to publish them (i think)
All in all I don't know for 100% about any of these questions, your best bet would be top speak with a copyright lawyer (there are plenty in London :)
Corbis for example sell images of all these buildings, but they do not have all the clearance necessary.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/18/2025 12:05:21 PM EDT.
