Can I sell pics taken as a spectator at a marathon?

[tomd]

If there is an event, let's say a marathon, and I decide to go and take photographs from the spectator area, can I then sell these pictures?

A friend tried this and the event organization told him to take down his gallery as he did not have permission from the event organization to sell photographs. They told him all rights to commercial photography were reserved.

Are they overstepping their authority or is this practice (selling the pics) illegal?

Tom

[michael_]

is the spectator area public domain? if it is i dont think they can enforce anything, if it was in a stadium or something i think they can.

Dont quote me though

[tomd]

is the spectator area public domain?

Yes, such as standing on a street corner taking pics of each runner as they come by.

[ssim]

If you are within a public area and the competitor is as well they cannot stop you from taking the shots. However, you may be required to attain a model release of the identifiable persons in the image, this according to the letter of the law. If you have some way of designating them as editorial content you can get around this requirement but that may be tough.

The thing that I am not clear on is when a city shuts down its streets for the competitors, is that still deemed to be public or has the event assumed a level of privacy (legally speaking) that they can do this sort of thing.

[Gatorboy]

However, you may be required to attain a model release of the identifiable persons in the image, this according to the letter of the law.

Only if you want to use the image commercially.

[TeeJay]

Might also help replies if we knew what part of the world you were based? ;-)

TJ

[tomd]

Might also help replies if we knew what part of the world you were based? ;-)

TJ

Ooops, I forgot that, I am in the US.

[tomd]

So far I don't have any responses that indicate that I cannot take pictures of competitors during a marathon and sell them via an online gallery.

As long as I am and the competitor is on public domain.

No one has commented on the possibility that the race organization claims all rights to commercial photography. Sounds like just their way of scaring off non-affiliated (with the race org.) photographers

[Wilt]

My answer is the same as ssim's response!

Taking the photo is ultimately question of you being on 'public' property (or not) if an event has official use of the streets. Keep in mind 'reasonable expectation of privacy', so you cannot take a photo of Paris Hilton in the public latrine thru the hole you had drilled.

Second issue is selling the photo...and that entails property releases or model releases, when the photo is to be sold for money. No release, no selling the photo for commercial use.

Being in a public place, taking photos of places and people in public places, you can have your photo used for editorial puuposes.

[symes]

So far I don't have any responses that indicate that I cannot take pictures of competitors during a marathon and sell them via an online gallery.

As long as I am and the competitor is on public domain.

No one has commented on the possibility that the race organization claims all rights to commercial photography. Sounds like just their way of scaring off non-affiliated (with the race org.) photographers

There is nothing they can do to stop you, but you can't sell them without a release...you can post them and you can get away with selling them to the individual competitors but it is a slippery slope!

Cheers,

[tomd]

There is nothing they can do to stop you, but you can't sell them without a release...

Since the official event photographers take pics and sell them ,etc, I am assuming (yes, assuming is a dangerous thing) that somewhere in the fine print of the marathon registration is a "model release".


I'll have to read one sometime.

Tom

[ssim]

Only if you want to use the image commercially.
Didn't he say he wanted to sell them, that seems commercial to me.

[ssim]

Since the official event photographers take pics and sell them ,etc, I am assuming (yes, assuming is a dangerous thing) that somewhere in the fine print of the marathon registration is a "model release".


I'll have to read one sometime.

Tom
There is probably something in the registration that covers this. Could be similar to when I used to register my kids for little league that form also covered our consent to allow them to have their pictures taken.

[Wilt]

Since the official event photographers take pics and sell them ,etc, I am assuming (yes, assuming is a dangerous thing) that somewhere in the fine print of the marathon registration is a "model release".




But a model release giving the event organizer permission to use the photo commercially does not cover YOUR photos!!!!

[tomd]

But a model release giving the event organizer permission to use the photo commercially does not cover YOUR photos!!!!


Correct, thank you. I did not mean to imply that it would cover my photos.
Sorry for the confusion.

[Julio]

He can do whatever he likes and that includes selling them. As to what the buyer does, that's their responsibilty. For example, they can't use them commercially (which is NOT the same as editorially) without a model release. But the onus is upon the buyer.

[blackshadow]

Usually commercial use is deemed as use in advertising or endorsing a product - generally selling prints is not deemed "commercial use" in this context.

[mikep00]

Who are you trying to sell the photos to? I know some people that do this and sell the photos to the runners. THis is the best situation as they can sign a model release form and then buy the photo of themselves. So no legal troubles.

[SBCmetroguy]

Who are you trying to sell the photos to? I know some people that do this and sell the photos to the runners. THis is the best situation as they can sign a model release form and then buy the photo of themselves. So no legal troubles.

Having never done this but considered it myself, I've been reading this thread and have learned a lot (and been confused a lot.)

My question now would be, to the above quote, if the runner chooses to purchase the image of himself from the photog's website, then why would he have to sign a model release to purchase a photo of himself? That part I'm confused on.

Also, if there happen to be other runners in the background, and the runner in the foreground is purchasing the photo, do model releases have to be obtained from the runners in the background if they are fully visible?

[runninmann]

Having never done this but considered it myself, I've been reading this thread and have learned a lot (and been confused a lot.)

My question now would be, to the above quote, if the runner chooses to purchase the image of himself from the photog's website, then why would he have to sign a model release to purchase a photo of himself? That part I'm confused on.

Also, if there happen to be other runners in the background, and the runner in the foreground is purchasing the photo, do model releases have to be obtained from the runners in the background if they are fully visible?I think some posts may not have realized the the OP's intention is to sell the photos to the individual runners, not to some 3rd party.

Almost all fairly large races have photogs set up along the course, sometimes with a banner to alert the runners that their photos will be taken. The photog then, through an arrangement with the race organizers, obtains the personal information of the race participants and, by cross referencing the race number worn on the front to the name on the entrants' list, sends a proof to the participant along with an order form and website link to allow interested parties to order prints.

The photog probably has some expectation of exclusivity as the "official" photographer, but probably not legally.

The disadvantage to the unofficial shooter would be obtaining the information of the participants in order to inform them of the opportunity to buy from him or her.

[blackshadow]

I doubt very much that the OP needs any release to sell the photos as long as they are not for "commercial use". Selling prints to anyone is not usually deemed to be commercial use.

[Tee Why]

In the US, my understanding is that if you are in a public place and take pictures of a person in public, where privacy is not expected (public restrooms and such). The image can be sold without any release as art and non commercial use.

The famous case is that photog who set up lights in a public street in NY and shot a portrait of a Orthodox Jewish man, who sued the photog as he sold the prints for a lot of money. The courts ruled in the photogs favor.

Here is a link to the story.
http://blog.photoblogs.org/2006/02/19/selling-pictures-of-strangers/
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/arts/design/19phot.html?ex=1300424400&en=f7e05d1e10cf9b14&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

[delhi]

I am reminded of another thread about contracted photographers. LOL!!!