I've used model releases when photographing children (usually) and then wanted to supply the photograph to a buyer. Most parents lined out any reference to advertising, and I was fine with that. I was, however, careful to know what the end use of the photographer would be when I sold it.
Having said all of this, no release is worth any more than the integrity of the photography asking for the release or the of the person/entity that purchases the photograph from him/her. Unfortunately, my cynicism says that's not worth the hassle. So I rarely photograph people at all.
d2b2 wrote:
Ask three attorneys the same question and you will often get three different answers!
And three different invoces!
tHANKs
An artist has a right to show his work--but to sell you need a release
Stan
BHC
Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA
stan0301 wrote:
An artist has a right to show his work--but to sell you need a release
Stan
There are numerous factors that control an artist's right to show his work. But a wise and valid release should address those issues.
marmot
Loc: U.S., now South America
I don't know much about other country's legal systems, but the U.S. has gone crazy with law suits. That seems to be brought on by the tremendous amount of $ to be made if you win, and so many attorneys will take a case without upfront payment in hopes of scoring big.
Being retired from Federal law enforcement, I've seen a couple seemingly good attorneys make a bad verbal mistake.
Living in third world countries has made me aware that some people have paid off a family there by giving a very few thousand U.S. dollars for a DUI death. Everyone seemed happy with that. Not so back home in the States.
Yes, I realize that much of what I said doesn't answer your question, but I'm waiting for dinner!
stan0301 wrote:
An artist has a right to show his work--but to sell you need a release
Stan
Selling a photograph has nothing to do with a model release.
It's the
use that determines if a release is required. If it is used to illustrate a news story, if it is included in a book, or if it is hung as a decoration... there is no need for a model release.
If the image is used to advertise something else, a release is required.
d2b2
Loc: Catonsville, Maryland, USA
Apaflo wrote:
Selling a photograph has nothing to do with a model release.
It's the use that determines if a release is required. If it is used to illustrate a news story, if it is included in a book, or if it is hung as a decoration... there is no need for a model release.
If the image is used to advertise something else, a release is required.
Contests frequently requiremodel releases, do they not?
d2b2 wrote:
Contests frequently requiremodel releases, do they not?
Typically they might. The reason is pretty simple too! They want to use the winning photos to advertise themselves and their contest at a minimum, and possibly for sponsors etc.
cjc2
Loc: Hellertown PA
IMHO, if you want a legal opinion, you need to contact a lawyer. Many of the responses listed so far could be considered helpful, but unless the respondent is licensed to practice law, they should not be depended upon. If you are THAT concerned either refuse to sign the release, or consult a licensed attorney before you do. It's always better to pay a small amount to get a legal opinion than to need to hire a lawyer to handle a case. Best of luck.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.