STICKY: When do I need a Release?

It's been posted a few times before. You do not need releases of photos that you are not going to use commercially. You can take all the pictures of homeless people that you want. You can put them on your website (so long as you're not using them to directly advertise a product.) You can put them in schoolbooks, in newspapers, in magazine stories, and any other artistic or editorial context you can think of. You can not, however, use them in advertisements. That would require a release.

Releases are not about "can I take a picture", but rather "what can I do with a picture".

Chakal...
Thanks for your response.

Here's my ques,
"what I can do with a picture", does that mean entering photo contest is ok?

Usually, in the "Rules", some kind of release is needed, right???

If needed, how would you handle the situation?

I believe that a photo contest would not require a release, unless the rules of the contest wanted one. (I would think that they would, since most contests will then use the winning pictures in ways that might be considered as advertisement.) If the rules of the contest require a release, then make sure you have some printed out and in your pocket when you go out shooting the homeless. After you get the shot, and assuming you feel safe doing so, approach the person and tell them that you just took their photo and would like to ask them to sign a release. Offer them some money (say, $5), and you'll probably get a signature.

I'm not a lawyer, though, so I could be wrong.

Chakalakasp
I see. I guess I am not a pro so I am not prepared with a release in my pocket.

I am just wondering in the event that the "lucky shot" happens to be a winner, then what?

PhotoAttorney wrote in post #2818786
Having a model release is a little safer especially when you are using it to promote something. Generally, displaying your work as an example of what you do as in a portfolio would be considered an editorial use. The church brochure may border on advertising/commercial use.

Best,
Carolyn

I got and read some of your book. I like it, but wanted more in the editoral vs. commercial section. It's not always practical to get a release. Maybe some more examples of what is what. I realize that the law is vague and subject to interpretation. If you do a coffee table book on gymnastics is that editorial? You mentioned putting shots on your website was editorial if you didn't post for sale or pricing. That would have been good info in the book.

There is a small ebook that my photography friend recommended to me, however I have yet to buy it. I've found with the photography that I do, I always get a release form done.

Follow this like the bible, it is the best advice one can get on this topic.

Just a little more clarification... I read the beginning of the posts and very helpful - Thanks! In the initial post it states "a picture of someone or something"... So we are putting together a coffee table book on some unique tress in the area and if I am reading this correctly we will need to get a release from homeowners to take pictures of their tree(s) if we want to use them?

When do I need a release?

When you take a picture of someone or something and plan on selling it commercially for use in ads, for example, you need a release. It is not your image or property and everyone has a right to control the uses of both.

I certainly don't think that you would need a release for the use of a picture of a tree as long as there are not identifiable things in the background, like a business name. If it was only a house, I don't think that you would need one. This is just my opinion though.

You would need to request permission to go on their property if you want to shoot from there otherwise you have to shoot from public property.

Right now I'm having a hard time figuring out where editorial use ends and commercial use begins.

Let's say I'm displaying photos on my website. I go to many events (some public, some for my school), and the photos I take get posted online. I also use my SmugMug site as a proofing system for portraits, and will password-protect a gallery when it's requested. Here's where I'm having some trouble understanding things. In my mind, I see these photos as being editorial - they certainly aren't being sold or used to advertise anything; they're just there for people to see. However, I can see the argument that these photos are, in fact, being used to promote something: me and my photography. Legally, how well does this argument hold up?

One teacher at my school is an amateur photographer, and he just recently saw my website. He complimemented me on my photos, then quickly told me that he was concerned that I don't have any model releases. I told him that I felt that he was incorrect because just publishing photos online does not require a release, but he insisted that I was wrong. If anybody would care to take a minute or two to take a glance at my website, I'd appreciate any thoughts or comments on that. My website is: www.jbphotography.smug​mug.com.

I was thinking, though, that if that's concidered commercial use, then shouldn't any use where photo credit is given be considered commercial? i.e., a photo in a newspaper doesn't require a model release, but if photo credit is given, couldn't you argue that the photo is technically promoting the photographer?

What about an online portfolio? My online "portolio" is www.flickr.com/photos/​jasonboulanger (and yes, I know this isn't the most professional approach, but for right now, it's working fine). I would say that my smugmug account is meant more for sharing photos, whereas my flickr account is just to display my better photos, thus promoting myself and my photography service. Is this commercial use?

Sorry for the long post, but what I was told today got me thinking. I'm not too worried though, as I figure that if I was going to get any complaints, I would have gotten them long ago. I do plan on getting releases in the future where I think it is necessary, but for the time being I think I'm OK. But let's say somebody did have a problem; would they be required to send a Cease and Desist letter before filing a lawsuit?

I'm not an expert, but my understanding is....

Posting on your webiste is editorial if you don't offer them for sale on the site. This assumes that they were taken in public with no expectations of privacy. You also should remove them if requested. I put a note on my online albums of events saying such. It's not an advertisement if they are not shown endorsing you or your sevices; it is instead an editorial of events your attended and the pictures you've taken.

I often end of selling these photos to the subjects of them after they email me.

I have model releases too with automatic online purchasing, but those albums in my gallery are hidden from public view even though I could show them. Those I also use within my portfolio and plan on using in my webistes front end when I get around to working on it.

I have been approached to shoot parties and events at local clubs and bars. The images would be posted on their respective websites under an "event photos" section. The images would be captured in public domains and would not be sold. Would a release be required? Thanks!

KAINAM13 wrote in post #3270135
I have been approached to shoot parties and events at local clubs and bars. The images would be posted on their respective websites under an "event photos" section. The images would be captured in public domains and would not be sold. Would a release be required? Thanks!

It depends on how it is put on the site. If a gallery or pictures of events, I would say ok (editorial), but if it is the home page logo or picutre with text on it, show that person endorsing the bar then I would say you need a release. Again, I no expert, just read some stuff.

Would anyone know if a faxed model release would be considered legal? I didn't have a model release on hand when I took some photos and my friend is now back in another country after a short visit. I'm sure he could mail an original signed form but it would be more convenient to fax it over.

Wow! What a minefield! I work for a holiday company in a resort in Italy and have been asked to shoot the photos for the company website and in house publicity. If I shoot say, the restaurant full of people, do I need to get a release from every person if the photos will end up in a brochure or web page? I will be paid to shoot the photos but I'm not actually selling any prints. After I am paid do I still own the rights to the photos?
Thanks for any help