RDKirk wrote in post #11231178
Putting the images in a password-protected gallery and offering them for purchase is
not a commercial use. You do not need a release to offer and sell the images themselves.
However, presenting the images to the general public as examples of your photographer skill in order to gain new business
is a commercial use, and for that you would need model releases.
There is so much mis-information about model releases here on POTN!
Putting images in an online gallery (password or not) and offering them for sale to the participants most certainly is commercial in nature. You need permission from the pageant organizer to shoot. The participants' parents and guardians will sign a waiver or release with the organizer, which nearly always includes authorizing photography be done and images posted online afterward as a condition of their participation, so don't necessarily need to sign anything with the photographer.
However, I agree that you do not need to sign a model release for this purpose... when offering prints and/or files of the images to the participants and their families, even though it is commercial in nature... It's an exception. You would need one if the images were to be licensed and sold for other commercial usage by parties other than the participants and their families, such as advertising. For example, if the pageant organizer wanted to use one of your images in a marketing piece or on their promotional website, Then it should be properly model released.
You do not need a signed model release for your personal portfolio display either, whether it's online or prinited. Worst that can happen, someone asks you to not show their kid's picture, you take it down, and that's the end of story. No harm, no law suit, no cost. Actually it's more of a courtesy than anything, though, since as it stands now portfolio examples of your work are specifically excluded from needing a signed model release. Portfolio examples are considered "editorial" in nature by the courts, for purposes of model releases. If asked to remove an image you could probably fight the issue and win, but it's likely not worth it. From a customer relations and practical standpoint, just remove the image if asked to do so.
Now, if you were making up a marketing piece for yourself, such as a printed brochure or a self-promotion website (aside from the "portfolio" or "gallery" areas of such a website), even using the image on your business cards or to make greeting cards for sale to the general public, you should have a signed model release on file.
All that said, it's always good to get a signed release whenever you can, especially with kids. The images you make will have more possible uses in the future, much higher potential value, and you will be in a better position to avoid silly legal action that can be costly to you even if you ultimately win in the end.
A model release is just a "risk reducer" in any event. If you never got one, you actually might never need one no matter how you use the images. It just makes it less likely that you'll get sued, or that someone you license the image to will get sued, if you get one signed but doesn't completely eliminate the possibility. Most companies licensing images from you will want and expect that you'll have a signed release on file, to reduce their risk.
Fine art and general editorial (news) usage does not require a release, although more and more editorial users are asking for them too. And there are certain types of photography that have higher risk than others...
For example, I'd always insist on a signed model release with any nude or suggestive "boudour" photography. You should also get solid proof of age, too, to go along with it. Of course this is not even a consideration with younger kids such as we're talking about here.
Offer prints, but be prepared to provide digital images. I sell an 8x10 for $20 and a digital file download large enough to make a good 8x10 for $18 each. I'll discount either if customer is buying a large number of images. I won't offer a "lazy photographer CD" where I just give them a whole bunch of high rez files and tell them to print them themselves. I will provide a CD, though, if they wish.
I wouldn't provide a complete CD to the organizer, unless it were only watermarked thumbnails or proofs. Then they would need to request specific images and you could continue to monitor and control usage, avoid possible misuses where a release might be important, for example. I do help out organizers with images for their websites and marketing materials, gratis, because after all they give me free promotion, links, exceptional access to their events and occasionally even a free meal! Since I work with the same organizers year after year, what's good for them is good for me. And, besides, whenever they use my images (with a credit or a link) I often see a fresh uptick in sales.
