Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Street photography information
Page <prev 2 of 2
Jan 14, 2021 18:11:56   #
hoola
 
Jaackil wrote:
You need to understand the term commercial as applied to photography and art. In the eyes of the law commercial mean and is limited to advertising or promoting a product service company or individual. So if you merely sell pictures that is not necessarily commercial. Receiving compensation in some way does not make the images or there use commercial. So you take a picture of a pretty girl walking down the street. You can sell it as art, or as a stock photo, sell it to a publisher for use in (not on the outside) a book. However take that same picture and sell it to Pepsi who uses it in an ad you need a release. Post that Image on your website in a gallery of pics no release needed if you are not promoting your services as a photographer. However move that image to the home page or cover of the gallery you would need a release if the images is promoting your services as a photographer.
So don’t confuse Commercial with “for money” or commerce
Keep in mind this is an international forum. This only applies to the US and US laws every country is different.
For who ever wants to say well my state or city has an ordinance that is different. No they don’t unless they have seceded fromthe union and they no longer honor the constitution. 1st and 4th amendment rights have been upheld by the DOJ consistently.
You need to understand the term commercial as appl... (show quote)

No serious stock agency will accept photos of people without a model release unless they are solely going to license it for editorial use only .

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 19:55:20   #
Stardust Loc: Central Illinois
 
With tongue somewhat in cheek, but aware this is becoming the new norm, if you post the photos and you are accused that you caused stupid people to do stupid, dangerous or illegal actions, then you could lose your Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snap, etc. accounts. You also expose yourself to being impeached on UHH.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 20:26:07   #
RodeoMan Loc: St Joseph, Missouri
 
Jim, you seem to think that a teacher's work day consists only of the time that they are in front of a class. Lessons do not prepare themselves, and in class work, homework, and tests do not grade themselves. And that does not even touch on other duties they have beyond their classroom work. Teachers are charged with one of the most important jobs in our society that of preparing our children for the future. I think they deserve being treated as professionals and compensated accordingly. As far as the photograph that was posted, I can't discern, from my moniter, whether she is pregnant or not. I also do not see how you can use her sign as evidence of a failure of the education system. While I would not have chosen to express myself as she did, she spelled each word correctly and seemingly stated exactly what she meant to say.

Reply
 
 
Jan 14, 2021 21:32:07   #
Miami39 Loc: Florida
 
Personally, I would ask a lawyer but if an event is on public property, there should not be an issue. That said, many courthouses, for example, do not permit photography. There are many other issues beyond a public space that must be considered, which are too complicated for this space. There are issues such as a person’s right of privacy, presenting someone in a false light, defamation, etc.

The law also can get complicated as to whether you took or used a persons likeness for commercial gain.

I am NOT giving legal advice but those of you who take videos or make audio recordings, in particular, can run into thorny issues depending upon State and Federal law. Just be careful. Being on the wrong end of a lawsuit is expensive, even if you win.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 21:56:28   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
goldenyears wrote:
Many, many years ago, at the very beginning of the Internet, I wanted to take some photos to illustrate the website I was building for my employer. I wanted to show scenes of a parade that went down the town's main street. I was told that if I was photographing someone or something in the parade it would not require permission, and if there were people in the photo watching the parade, even from within their home or business along the street, that was okay too, because they were not the subject of the photo. But if I was to photograph those same people as the subject of a photo, that would require their permission to be obtained. That's the advice I received back then.
Many, many years ago, at the very beginning of the... (show quote)


In this case, using photos for a company website, it is commercial usage (advertising or promotion) and that's why you would need releases. If you were doing photojournalism or other editorial use, you wouldn't need a release even if a particular person was the subject of the photo.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 22:45:00   #
frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.
 
hoola wrote:
No serious stock agency will accept photos of people without a model release unless they are solely going to license it for editorial use only .


That all depends, and is not a 100% accurate statement. Have you had some turned down.

Reply
Jan 15, 2021 14:47:34   #
hoola
 
frankraney wrote:
That all depends, and is not a 100% accurate statement. Have you had some turned down.


Yes I have . Getty Images .

Reply
 
 
Jan 15, 2021 22:25:09   #
frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.
 
hoola wrote:
Yes I have . Getty Images .


If there is only one of two faces close up they will usually be turned down. I have not had any turned down. But I did have one turned down because a trucks license plate was showing. The reason, it might be someone in the wrong place at the wrong time. Go figure.

But people. If there are several and no one is the main subject, they will usually pass, if street shots.

Reply
Feb 12, 2021 22:28:18   #
hoola
 
Interesting that license plates comes up . I always wonder why folx selling cars on Craigs List scribble over or black out there license plates . Curious . Anyone know why ? Yet they will give the V.I.N. of the car .

Reply
Feb 12, 2021 22:46:31   #
User ID
 
JimBart wrote:
I’d be careful with what I’m posting these days in light of what’s been going on in Washington and other areas this past year.

No problem. Sue me and I claim to be working for gov’t intel svc. Ask me to document that and you’ll be informed that intel services regs prohibit release or disclosure of such docs.

Reply
Feb 13, 2021 00:29:04   #
frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.
 
hoola wrote:
Interesting that license plates comes up . I always wonder why folx selling cars on Craigs List scribble over or black out there license plates . Curious . Anyone know why ? Yet they will give the V.I.N. of the car .


As I said, the photo was turned down because the vehicle could belong to someone that might be in the wrong place. Insuating that a person is supposed to be at work someplace a long ways from where the picture is taken and will have to explain what they were doing there.

Reply
 
 
Feb 13, 2021 22:40:08   #
hoola
 
frankraney wrote:
As I said, the photo was turned down because the vehicle could belong to someone that might be in the wrong place. Insuating that a person is supposed to be at work someplace a long ways from where the picture is taken and will have to explain what they were doing there.


I don't think you understood me . I was not talking about a foto of a strangers cars plate . I was talking about craigs list used car sellers who own car they are selling who for whatever reason block out the license plate .

Reply
Feb 16, 2021 11:02:47   #
frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.
 
hoola wrote:
I don't think you understood me . I was not talking about a foto of a strangers cars plate . I was talking about craigs list used car sellers who own car they are selling who for whatever reason block out the license plate .


I did understand. And commented that I have had photos turned down because of license plate showing. That makes the vehicle identifiable and the plate can be traced to owner. That is the reason mine was turned down.

Reply
Feb 16, 2021 11:19:07   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
Teacher22 wrote:
Hey, fellow Hedgehogs....
I’m just wondering about some street and protest photography I have taken over the years. Can I post, publish or display people that I took pictures of a few years ago? In particular, KKK March in 1981 and an Arian protest in 2010.
I’m just wondering if I should have gotten written permission since it was a public demonstration.
Any advise would be appreciated. I have converted some to B&W and framed for my own use but not anything else. I have been freelancing for a number of years.
This is really very similar to what we have seen recently and I thought about posting just for information.
Hey, fellow Hedgehogs.... br I’m just wondering ab... (show quote)


Always check with an attorney, but, if you are not using the image for commercial purposes, you probably have no problem. Commercial purposes vs editorial use is where you need advice. For instance, if you are using the images inside a book, you are probably fine. If you are using the image on the cover, that might be advertising and commercial. So it all depends.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.