Photo Booth Modeling Release?

Ignore this post, I found what I needed in this page: http://www.danheller.c​om/model-release-primer.html

Thanks to those who linked to it when others asked similar questions!
---------------
Hello everyone,

I have done some searching, and I can't find another post that answers what I am looking for (rare on this site!)

I have a photo booth company, just started, and I want to do a couple weddings for my friends for cheap, in the exchange for letting me use the images on my website in my portfolio and for my advertising. I obviously don't want to get a model release from every single group that goes through there... how should I proceed?

Here is my initial plan:
Add this clause in my contract with the organizer:
Marshall Photography retains copyright of all images taken at the event. (Marshall Photography will use them for advertising, portfolio use, non-commercial sales, etc.) Marshall Photography gives permission to use the photos printed at the event for any purpose except for reproduction or redistribution.

I'm hoping that would be enough. But there can be kids too, who are minors so I'm still worried about it.

Should I put some fine print on the first screen of the photo booth such as:
By pressing the button below to start taking your photos you hereby give Marshall Phtography the unqualified right to take pictures and/or recordings of you and grant the perpetual right to use your likeness, image, photo (collectively, “image”), without compensation, for broadcast or exhibition in any medium and to put the finished pictures/recordings to any legitimate use without limitation or reservation. You hereby waive, release and forever discharge Marshall Photography from and against any and all claims or actions arising out of or resulting from any use of your image.

Yuck! That definitely looks tacky... I could put it on the outside of the booth and change it to: "by entering this booth..." Still tacky.

Another problem, I would like to upload the images to a website like zen-folio so that the people can go to the site and purchase a 4x6 of their picture if they want one... is that a problem too?

how do wedding photographers deal with this problem? Obviously they want to have pictures on their websites of people other than the bride and groom... and sell them too...

Thanks so much for your advice!

I found a shorter one that may be less tacky to have in smallish print on the bottom of the screen inside:
"By participating in this activity you consent to us photographing you and using the resulting pictures for any purpose without payment to you."
It doesn't sound as "legalese", but I think it would help cover myself.

I found everything I needed in this website page!: http://www.danheller.c​om/model-release-primer.html

When asking legal questions you need to say where you are. Laws vary dramatically depending on location.

robots4joey wrote in post #14219737
Here is my initial plan:
Add this clause in my contract with the organizer:
Marshall Photography retains copyright of all images taken at the event. (Marshall Photography will use them for advertising, portfolio use, non-commercial sales, etc.) Marshall Photography gives permission to use the photos printed at the event for any purpose except for reproduction or redistribution.

This wont work. the organisers can't give you permission to use someone else's likeness for advertising. Only the person whose likeness you want to use can do that. That means you need a signed model release.

At least in the US the law specifies a signed model release. I don't know if clicking a box legally qualifies as signing.

There are some states in the US that do not require a written release (thus, not signed). California is one--it requires "permission" (as all states do), but not necessarily written permission.

However, failing to get a signed release--especially in California--is madness, regardless of that loophole.

From looking at that article I linked above, it appears that I do not need releases to show examples of my work, but I would if I wanted to use a picture to advertise my business. Seems like a pretty hard-to decipher line to me. So if I used an image on a business card or brochure, I would get a release, but if I have it in a gallery on my website, I do not plan to.

robots4joey wrote in post #14236658
From looking at that article I linked above, it appears that I do not need releases to show examples of my work, but I would if I wanted to use a picture to advertise my business. Seems like a pretty hard-to decipher line to me. So if I used an image on a business card or brochure, I would get a release, but if I have it in a gallery on my website, I do not plan to.

I don't know that the case has ever been proven in court, but I suspect a gallery on a website that solicits for a photography business would be considered a commercial use that requires a model release.

My state law explicitly exempts in-studio display and hardcopy portfolios from the need for a model release, but that law was written in pre-internet days...they only had hardcopy display in mind.

Hardcopy studio displays and hardcopy portfolios are seldom directly accompanied by commercial "call to action" text. A studio display or harcopy portfolio would actually present that "hard-to-decipher" line between an art exhibit (not requiring a model release) and advertising more so than a gallery on a solicitation website.