Copyrights and book publication

Hi guys ! This forum is full of great people and it is a huge source of knowledge. Let me ask you how is the copyright situation looks like when you trying publish a book.

I live in very unique town, tourist place in the summer, beautiful year around. I'm planning to publish a book. Photo book of course... as you may already noticed my writing skills are poor )) But I'm a photographer not a writer.

Let me show you few things - sorry for quality I'm linking from FB

I'm guessing this is absolutely NO GO, building is owned by private person, business is owned by private person I need property release for sure... main subject of the picture is obvious

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'text/plain'

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'text/plain'

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'text/plain'

Someone else will have to help you with the exact citation...
AFAIK... You don't actually need a property release for anything. The only people I have ever heard of requiring them is Stock agencies (as part of some CYA) Permission for trademarks for commercial use... sure. However a book isn't commercial, and I don't see any reason for you to need a release for any of this. (property or model)
I have heard people say that a cover of a book can be considered advertising. So I would pick something like the third picture, that is, no identifiable people and to possible trademarks.

I could agree with it but I would rather not risk and as a photographer I have lots of respect to work and property of others.

Of course you can say that book is not a commercial, however I'm not planning to give this book for free and yes I plan to sell it and make money so can be considered commercial...

Let me just remind this is a Photo Book, not much text, 95% are pictures of course.

I can agree to the cover it can be taken as an advertising...

The fact that you sell it doesn't make it commercial use. Commercial use refers to the use of a photo for advertising or marketing. If sold for money made it commercial use then all fine art would be commercial as well (but its not)

Photobooks are still a presentation of art. As long as your jurisdiction doesn't have a limit on what can be considered fine art (CA requires it to be limited for example). I think it would be easy to get this considered as art. Regardless there are no laws that require property releases for even commercial use.

About permission for buildings, see the current thread in this forum, "Release for old building in scenic." It's still on Page 1.

OhLook I saw discussion about old Building and as far I know to photograph someones property you need permission, to use it you also need permission...

Matt... thank you for little more details, seems legit I think you right about commercial / art publications

rypson wrote in post #16659749
OhLook I saw discussion about old Building and as far I know to photograph someones property you need permission, to use it you also need permission...

None of these photos would require releases for the stated purpose.

You would need a property release if you were using the building to advertise (endorse) something. Example: "Endless Summer only sells Bob's Board Wax -- The BEST Board Wax."

You are producing an art book and don't need any releases.

The reason why stock agencies always want releases is because they don't want to be limited in any way how they can use a photo. They may have a customer who wants to use one of your photos like my example above. Your use is limited without a release but it is not limited in any way that matters to you if all you are doing is making a picture book.

rypson wrote in post #16659749
OhLook I saw discussion about old Building and as far I know to photograph someones property you need permission

That's odd. Some posts there, from people with lots of experience, say you don't need permission for the outsides of buildings. If you can get a picture of something from an unrestricted public area, go ahead. Just don't trespass.

If Google Street View can publish photos of all the buildings along a street, so can anyone else.

Blaster this is great explanation... thank you

OhLook wrote in post #16660270
That's odd. Some posts there, from people with lots of experience, say you don't need permission for the outsides of buildings. If you can get a picture of something from an unrestricted public area, go ahead. Just don't trespass.

You don't need a release for any physical property - inside or out and it doesn't even make a difference if you were trespassing (although you might get prosecuted for that).

Of course someone might decide to sue you but the fact is more people get sued by unhappy brides than have ever been sued for selling/publishing images of physical property.