question about legalities...

[JMHPhotography]

Ok... I'm somewhat familiar with how it works, but this one is a little bit gray to me.

I was at a little league baseball game today. It was actually an all-stars tournament. And there was a guy there taking photos of the game which he posts on Smug Mug for sale. I noticed that he had the camera turned to my 11 and 4 year old daughters and grabbed a few shots of them. Probably because they were wearing festive stuff for the 4th of July festivities we would be going to later. I visited his site and noticed that he has his photos posted and they are up for sale to anyone who wants to buy them. I'm not comfortable with this. I'm thinking he should not be allowed to do this without a signed model release from either me or their mother since he's selling the photos for profit. I know that if he were shooting for a paper, that's a different story. I don't think I'd be bothered by it so much, but anyone could go on his site and buy large prints or even the original digital file of my daughters. That has my wife freaked out... and I'm not freaked out, but I'm uncomfortable with it.

First.. is it legal for him to post and sell prints and digital downloads of my daughters without my permission?

Second... how would you handle the situation were you in my place?

[Moppie]

Since you talking about little league I assume your in the US??
Knowing for sure would help, as different countries have different laws.


That said, almost anywhere in the western world, if you want to make money from a photo with a person in it, you need that persons permission. This is of course a gross generalisation.

Now how that permission is obtained can vary.
For example he might have a contract with the league, and the league has something in its terms of service that each parent signs prior to thier kids playing. (This is just an example).
Generally if you buy tickets to an event, then at the same you also grant the promoters the right to use your image.


However, if your not happy with it then there are 2 things you can do:

1: Contact the photographer and explain you are unhappy, and ask him to take them down.

2: Get over it and accept that if you take your kids out in public there is a chance someone might take thier photo and put it on a website.

Try and look at it objectivly, if for any reason someone might want to buy the photos of your kids?
All the photographer wants to do is sell you a photo.
Chance he put them up there in the hope that YOU would buy the photos, because I can garuantee no one else will be interested in them, they will only be looking for photos of thier own kids, who like yours are the greatest and best looking kids in the world.

[RDKirk]

First.. is it legal for him to post and sell prints and digital downloads of my daughters without my permission?

Yes, it is legal, as long as he's not using them for trade, they aren't humiliating, and they aren't pornographic.

[JMHPhotography]

Yes, it is legal, as long as he's not using them for trade, they aren't humiliating, and they aren't pornographic.

isn't selling them considered, "for trade"?

[number six]

isn't selling them considered, "for trade"?

Yes, of course it is.

[JMHPhotography]

Since you talking about little league I assume your in the US??
Knowing for sure would help, as different countries have different laws.


That said, almost anywhere in the western world, if you want to make money from a photo with a person in it, you need that persons permission. This is of course a gross generalisation.

Now how that permission is obtained can vary.
For example he might have a contract with the league, and the league has something in its terms of service that each parent signs prior to thier kids playing. (This is just an example).
Generally if you buy tickets to an event, then at the same you also grant the promoters the right to use your image.


However, if your not happy with it then there are 2 things you can do:

1: Contact the photographer and explain you are unhappy, and ask him to take them down.

2: Get over it and accept that if you take your kids out in public there is a chance someone might take thier photo and put it on a website.

Try and look at it objectivly, if for any reason someone might want to buy the photos of your kids?
All the photographer wants to do is sell you a photo.
Chance he put them up there in the hope that YOU would buy the photos, because I can garuantee no one else will be interested in them, they will only be looking for photos of thier own kids, who like yours are the greatest and best looking kids in the world.

haha.. uhm, I did say the girls were dressed in 4th of July stuff for the festivities, right? What countries besides the U.S. do you know that celelbrates the 4th of July?

Ok.. I did a little more research and I guess unless he sells it as stock photography, he's ok legally. Now I just have to calm the wife down.

[RDKirk]

isn't selling them considered, "for trade"?

No. Some states have specifically defined photographs used "for trade" and "commercial use" as meaning being used to sell a product or service other than the photograph itself. But showing and selling the photographs themselves is considered showing and selling art, which is protected by the First Amendment, superseding state privacy laws, with the exceptions I mentioned.

[hollis_f]

I guess the only solution is to not let your children out of the house unless they're wearing a burka. After all, almost everybody carries a camera around with them all the time nowadays. Anybody could be taking photos surreptitiously.

[JMHPhotography]

I guess the only solution is to not let your children out of the house unless they're wearing a burka. After all, almost everybody carries a camera around with them all the time nowadays. Anybody could be taking photos surreptitiously.


Ok, let's not be ridiculous.

You completely missed the point. I don't care if my kids are photographed in public. That was never at issue. I think that I made that pretty clear. The only issue is whether or not this photographer could SELL for PROFIT pictures of my kids. The only thing I was questioning was if it was legal since the photos could be purchased by ANYONE who happened to be on that site. The point was made that it wasn't likely that would happen and I concede that point. It's not likely. But it is still possible.

Basically... let me photograph your kids and sell prints to people who are not you without your permission, and tell me how that would make you feel.

[Karl Johnston]

John; Contact the photographer on the phone or in person and ask to have them take down the photos. I say that because an e-mail may get lost or misinterpreted. Also, prior to that it would be a good idea to contact the league manager (not sure anything about baseball to be honest) or even holders and explain the situation, ask if the photographer is one of their guys or not or who it may have been.

Chances are that there is nothing malicious happening, but if you are right about being worried about your daughters being sold commercially (I mean where does it end? What happens if they end up on a stock company or something?)

I suppose you should also go talk to a lawyer if the photographer says no to removing the image, because I'm pretty sure you need a release to sell photographs of people commercially; and the release has to come from you...not the girls...as you are the parent and they are both under the age of 18.

[RDKirk]

Chances are that there is nothing malicious happening, but if you are right about being worried about your daughters being sold commercially (I mean where does it end? What happens if they end up on a stock company or something?)

Stock companies will require model releases because they know they have the deep pockets.

I suppose you should also go talk to a lawyer if the photographer says no to removing the image, because I'm pretty sure you need a release to sell photographs of people commercially; and the release has to come from you...not the girls...as you are the parent and they are both under the age of 18.

Selling the photographs directly is not considered a "commerical use." It does not require a release.

[Karl Johnston]

Stock companies will require model releases because they know they have the deep pockets.

Selling the photographs directly is not considered a "commerical use." It does not require a release.
Oh yeah, you're right..forgot that.

Oh woops, :o my mistake ! I suppose it's good I re-learn basic stuff like that.

[thebishopp]

Someone needs to make this interview with IP attorney Ed Greenburgh a sticky:

http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2008/archives/1645

[440roadrunner]

I'm no lawyer, but it may also depend on the ownership of the property envolved?


But look at it this way? If your kids are out in public, ANYONE can see and photgraph them, right? What if they just happened to be in a photo of something else, the background of the mayor, other official, almost anything? I doubt that you would have any grounds at all in a case like that.

(Might be different if someone had caught one of them with their pants falling down or some such)

The other thing you have to ask yourself is the big "so what?" Do these photos endanger my kids? How? How would they, any different than someone observing them nearby? These photos probably don't connect the kids to anything "of value" such as extremely rich parents, controversial politicians, or something as bizzare that would entice a kidnapping?

[wyofizz]

Someone needs to make this interview with IP attorney Ed Greenburgh a sticky:

http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2008/archives/1645


I don't see any videos available to click on.
Dave

[RDKirk]

I don't see any videos available to click on.
Dave

You have to wait for them. But you can go to youtube.com and search for "ed greenberg" to find them.

[JeffreyG]

Basically... let me photograph your kids and sell prints to people who are not you without your permission, and tell me how that would make you feel.

I don't have a problem with it in the context of what you described. The photographer was taking pictures and is posting them in an attempt to sell the pictures directly to the parents. This is a legitimate business and I fail to see any harm.

I'll address two other points:
1) This only falls into needing a release if the photos are being used as stock, where the subjects are essentially models.

2) There are some parents with a strange paranoia about innocent photos of their kids being online even in a legitimate sales format such as the OP posted. I'll come out and flat out state that this is silly for a few reasons.

a) There are literally millions of photos of kids on the internet, so yours are just a drop in the bucket.
b) In a huge country like the US there are actually only about 100 cases per year of a perfect stranger kidnapping a child for any reason including ransom.
c) Of those 100 cases per year, there are no cases that I'm aware of where the stranger selected their victim from random photographs on the internet.

Look around your neighborhood. See any kids? Wouldn't it be easier for a pedophile to grab a kid that way than to find one halfway across the country via randomly posted photographs?

[thebishopp]

I don't see any videos available to click on.
Dave

Scroll down. It is about halfway down. There are two. Part One and Part Two. As someone else said it is also on youtube.

Note: Part Two begins with the model releases.