RF Book: Model releases

[Rich Silfver]

Actually so far only good news.

I've been contacted by two people off the photo.net listing and one put me in contact with a "real" expert on the matter.

Rules differ by state and country and we have participants spread across the globe aiming to see to a global market.

But - even though the book will not be able to argue 'news-worthiness' the editorial and non-adverting aspects of the use of the photos (since they are in a context of 'rangefinder photography' without the expressed intent to market a product or service) seems to be enough to argue that the only photo that would require a model release is any photo on the covers.

He also reinforced that there is never a guarantee for lawsuits. People are allowed to sue even if they signed a model release. (What if the person works for...Pentax...who never released a rangefinder camera..and don't want to be associated with it, etc, etc).

SO - for now the 'ruling' is that it will only be the cover photos that will require a model release.

 

[peter_n]

Cool. This could have affected my choice but now it looks like we can make selections without having to worry about a release.

Thanks for taking the trouble to do the research, Richard. I saw your posting over on photo.net last night.

 

[sfaust]

I was also thinking about this issue this afternoon. There are numerous books published that contain a compilation of past editorial images, street photography, and the like submitted from different photograhers, and its highly unlikely that the are released images. I started to connect the dots with our project, and they seem very similar in nature.

But as Richard said, there are no guarantees! If the subject saw an image of themselves in the book and was upset about it for whatever their reason, who knows what their course of action would be towards the publisher and photographer. I'd keep the selections to upbeat images that would be hard to argue anything negatively in court.

I also think that if the title and introduction were worded corrrectly, it could easily lean more towards a journalistic work which would also additional protection.

Just some random thoughts...