weird legal issue
- Started
- Last post
- 27 Responses
- mxhxr10
being that you guys deal w/ images frequently, and may know about copyright stuff...
I was amazed to see my wife's face prominently featured on the cover of some college textbook. It's meant to be a random, clip art type image, but it's clearly her. She remembers it being taken by some dude as well, while she was in a public place.
Any recourse...?
- taragee0
pretty sure a photographer has to get a release form
- taragee0
i also think they need apermit to photograph even if it is a public place
- Jaline0
Yeah, this sort of stuff is always weird. I've been on stuff without permission too.
I think taragee is right.
- nicko0
When I did work for Dorling Kindersley about 10 years ago we used to have to get model release forms signed by people who appear prominantly in images. I'm not sure what (if any) recourse you have.
So, rather un helpfully I don't no
- k0na_an0k0
we deal with college textbooks and bookstores. this is what we get from most photographers when they send images....
"Dear Sir/Madam,
>
> The students and faculty in the images I've provided for the XXX webpage have all signed model releases granting permission for XXX to use their likeness as we please.
>
As the XXX photographer, I do not photograph anyone without their permission in writing before doing so. The release states "I irrevocable grant to XXX the absolute right: to use or authorize the use of the finished photographs in any manner and form and for any purpose whatsoever, including without limitation illustration, promotion, advertising, trade, display, exhibition or use in any periodical, journal or other publication....."
>
I give permission to XXX to use these images for the XXX."You may be able to sue, but they may not give a shite.
- Jaline0
yeah, even schools have to get permission from parents before the students are allowed to be in yearbooks and pictures and stuff.
- ivan_cook0
just saw this.
- paraselene0
your wife definitely has recourse. you should write to the photographer (or just straight-out invoice him).
i run a photo library (in the u.k., granted, but copyright law here is similar to that in the states). if you want some more in-depth advice, just send me an email.
- nicko0
I haven't thought about this before now but it's worth thinking about for a mo. What about all the images which include people on http://sxc.hu
Where do you stand if you use an image from there?
- paraselene0
those people pictured in the images on sxc.hu will have (or SHOULD have) been consulted about the distribution of their likeness). whether they're models or not.
simple as that.
- nicko0
thanks paraselene
- taragee0
lol its funny u say that cuz i was just browsing taht site and there are alot more nekkid people on there than i remeber...
- nicko0
's funny, I've never seen nekkid ppl there... what did you search for????
- taragee0
computer!
- Ell0
It's not a copyright issue so to speak as no-ones copyright has been infringed
However I can say almost for a fact the photographer should have got permission first.
Contact the publishers. Their contract with the photographer would almost certainly contain something along the lines of :
Photographer will obtain all releases, on a form to be obtained from ( Publisher), from all persons and owners of property pictured in any of the works
- nicko0
yikes!
- taragee0
hat ell said - thats what id do
act all crazy too liek "mah wyfe aint fer sale!!!" and smash up some stuff
- paraselene0
the onus of responsibility falls on the photographer. the publisher is in a good faith relationship with whichever photog he uses. the photographer has copyright over the image, but if he has been less than forthcoming with the subject about the usage of it then the subject has a legal right to sue.
- tkmeister0
we do photoshoots here and we always get release forms signed. i think in the past, we got into a problem because of this. also, agreement is different for web, print, billboard, etc... it has to be specific and models have to agree and sign.
- Ell0
Your issue is with the Publishers as they have published work that hasn't got the necessary releases.
The photographer may have (stupidly in this case ) signed a warranty that indemnifies them against prosecution should any claims like this surface