Model release confusion!

H

Horse

Messages
59
Name
Kevin
Edit My Images
No
I know this has been covered before but it would appear to be still a grey area for some of us!

Say for example, I'm at a public event. This could be anything from a Fete, Fair, Showjumping, Motor Race, in other words anything where there is a large amount of public. I see various people in the crowd, who's faces are worthy of a photograph (not children for obvious reasons). So I wander round snapping the portraits totally unbeknown to them. I then decide to make either greeting cards or framed prints of these photos and have them offered for sale via the internet.

My question is, can I do this without a signed Model Release form from them?
Let's face it, we can't go round to everyone who is in our pictures and get them to sign. Also, what happens if they see their picture on a card or print?
Do they have a right to complain or take legal action.

Bare in mind these are public events. I am also bemused as to the fact that press togs snap the celebrities or anybody in the news coming out of clubs or supermakets etc., without any legal issues.
 
Horse said:
Bare in mind these are public events. I am also bemused as to the fact that press togs snap the celebrities or anybody in the news coming out of clubs or supermakets etc., without any legal issues.
Click to expand...

The difference here is that the press togs are selling the photos for editorial purposes and you're talking about selling them for commercial purposes.
 
Good point Kev but there again, the papers are sold to make a profit.
I guess it gets more and more complicated!
 
The papers are sold to make a profit but you're not using the photos within them as a source of advertising (in general) if you get what I mean. Those photos are used to tell a story rather than advertise a product.

If you go to one of these public events then barring any restrictions the organisers have on photography, you could take a photo of someone and sell it to a paper without needing a model release as it's for editorial purposes.

If you try and sell that photo to a company who might be able to use the image for advertising then although technically you don't need a model release in the UK you could have problems with selling that photo without a release because it's now commercial rather than editorial.
 
Most of the examples you give, although the public attend them are probably private events - ie you have to pay to enter.

My opinion would be that yes, probably you can make greeting cards or prints and offer them for sale without model releases but be prepared for people in them to possibly get upset.

If you offered them as digital files rather than prints or let someone else sell them on your behalf, I think it would always be safer to get model releases

Purely my opinion
 
Kev M said:
The difference here is that the press togs are selling the photos for editorial purposes and you're talking about selling them for commercial purposes.
Click to expand...

Kev is bang on the money here!
 
If a person is the main subject of a photograph and you use it for post cards than a model release is a very good Idea.
If the person is incidental to the Photograph then one is not needed.
as an example a close up of a fisherman mending a net would be a portrait and need a release or at least permission.
A view of fishermen mending nets on a beach would not.

An argument could be made that a close up portrait was taken with the cooperation of the fisherman, and so permission was given by implication. It would be dangerous to rely on this argument today.
 
Horse said:
Say for example, I'm at a public event. This could be anything from a Fete, Fair, Showjumping, Motor Race, in other words anything where there is a large amount of public. I see various people in the crowd, who's faces are worthy of a photograph (not children for obvious reasons). So I wander round snapping the portraits totally unbeknown to them. I then decide to make either greeting cards or framed prints of these photos and have them offered for sale via the internet.
.
Click to expand...

Why not children ? I know what your driving at, but when do you not take a picture? When there's one 17 yr old in a crowd of 100 people, or perhaps they must be under 10, & more than 50% of the crowd? What if one was 11, is that then ok? If it's kids coming out of a school (ie all children) it would probably cause questions to be asked, but it seems paranoia to not include kids in photos. Sorry this is off topic for your original query but the children comment irks me !
 
The law is exceptionally clear on this matter:
If you are allowed to take photographs from where you are standing and if the person has no expectation of privacy, then you can take their photograph without their permission.

So for example, if you were stood on a public footpath outside someone's house and they were in their front garden relaxing, you would be allowed to take their photograph. However, if you were stood on a public footpath and took a picture of them in their bathroom having a shower, that would be invasion of privacy and an offence under the Human Rights Act at the least.

As for private property, if there is no restriction on photography (and this must be mentioned before you take any photographs by either agents of the landlord or signage) then you can take photographs as you please. If there are restrictions on photography and you breach those restrictions, you are trespassing, which is a civil offence. A note on trespass, all that can be done is to remove you from the premiss using reasonable force.

There is now the matter of libel and slander laws. If you use an image in a libellous manner (trying to damage their reputation unjustly) then you can be sued for damages to their reputation and it is you who must prove that what you said was true (libel applies to things printed, slander relates to things said).

Model releases themselves have no legal standing in law, besides contract law. But you cannot contract away someone's statutory right. Even with a model release you can be taken to court for libel and the judge can still find against you.
 
Last edited:
Coldeh said:
Model releases themselves have no legal standing in law, besides contract law. But you cannot contract away someone's statutory right. Even with a model release you can be taken to court for libel and the judge can still find against you.
Click to expand...

no you can't and you're right about model releases in UK law

but it would carry considerable "persuasive" value so if you were able to show the judge that the person suing you had (via the model release) a good understanding of how those photos would be used prior to them being taken
 
boyfalldown said:
no you can't and you're right about model releases in UK law

but it would carry considerable "persuasive" value so if you were able to show the judge that the person suing you had (via the model release) a good understanding of how those photos would be used prior to them being taken
Click to expand...
Agreed, but it will always be up to the judge in the matter.

I find some generalised contracts funny (EULAs for example) as most of the clauses are not legal within the UK and are therefore not binding. They still get you to agree to them.
 
Last edited:
The bit about libel reminds me of a kite-surfer I photographed in Suffolk.

I gave him my contact details and asked if he minded me putting the shots on my website - his response was "As long as they're not under the heading 'The Gay Kitesurfers Club'."

Phil
 
philthejuggler said:
The bit about libel reminds me of a kite-surfer I photographed in Suffolk.

I gave him my contact details and asked if he minded me putting the shots on my website - his response was "As long as they're not under the heading 'The Gay Kitesurfers Club'."

Phil
Click to expand...

He sounds like a good bloke :thumbs:
 
It would have been very funny to post them as B@m Bandits & C#~k Suckers Kite flyers club ! :thumbs:
 
Ok, I'm still confused.
A lot of people are stating that a model release has no weight under UK law. Let's say I have a TFCD shoot with a model, and I don't get a release form signed. Am I entitled to use that image to advertise a product? Throw it up on a billboard and slap it on the side of a tube of toothpaste?

If not, what legal documentation am I required to obtain before I am allowed to do such things with the images I take ?
 
Denyerec said:
Ok, I'm still confused.
A lot of people are stating that a model release has no weight under UK law. Let's say I have a TFCD shoot with a model, and I don't get a release form signed. Am I entitled to use that image to advertise a product? Throw it up on a billboard and slap it on the side of a tube of toothpaste?

If not, what legal documentation am I required to obtain before I am allowed to do such things with the images I take ?
Click to expand...

I think it will avoid any confusion if you do get a release - there's no reason not to!

Phil
 
Oh and I'd get a proof of age too.
 
Denyerec said:
Ok, I'm still confused.
A lot of people are stating that a model release has no weight under UK law. Let's say I have a TFCD shoot with a model, and I don't get a release form signed. Am I entitled to use that image to advertise a product? Throw it up on a billboard and slap it on the side of a tube of toothpaste?

If not, what legal documentation am I required to obtain before I am allowed to do such things with the images I take ?
Click to expand...

You are perfectly entitled to do just that.

But a consideration in doing so may be that photographs in the UK are subject to libel law, so for example, if your model didn't wish to be seen to endorse said toothpaste, and for whatever reason, felt her reputation had been danaged by being seen to do so she could sue you. A model release may help you avoid that situation
 
Denyerec said:
Ok, I'm still confused.
A lot of people are stating that a model release has no weight under UK law. Let's say I have a TFCD shoot with a model, and I don't get a release form signed. Am I entitled to use that image to advertise a product? Throw it up on a billboard and slap it on the side of a tube of toothpaste?

If not, what legal documentation am I required to obtain before I am allowed to do such things with the images I take ?
Click to expand...

You are not required by law to obtain any documentation in order to do what you like with the images. Although if your usage portrays the model in a negative manner (as percieved by them) then you may find yourself fighting a compensation claim.

You will, however, be required by agencies etc to have a model release and probably some sort of proof of age before they will use said image.

I makes sense to get a standard model release forum signed for any shoot you do if you plan on selling images - even if not required by law. It makes your images more likely to sell.
 
Anyone got an answer to this thread?

Pretty confusing answers given thus far that doesn't actually answer the question:

"Can I use images of people commercially without a release?"

Say I took photos of people and decided to sell prints (not just selling to the person who is in the photo).. could I do that without a release?
 
I think the answer that Coldeh gave in post #11 is about as good as it gets.

There is what you can do legally, which is quite a lot.
There is what you can do morally, which is often not very much.
And there is what you can get away with, which is down to all sorts of things and many differing, subjective, and constantly changing opinions.

I think the best guidance is probably that agencies will rarely accept an image where people can be clearly identified, without a model release. Whatever the rights and wrongs, legal or otherwise, it's just not worth the grief you're quite likely to get from any unauthorised use.

People don't like it, and these days the chances of them a) finding out that their picture has been used, and b) them kicking up a fuss, are quite high.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top