Add to Flipboard Magazine.

 

Many think they need a to get a person to sign a model release if they are in your photograph. That is not the case, and here is why.

 

A note on model releases for the people in photographs

In terms of model rights, the category 1 and 2 above differs in the way that any person in a commercial used photograph has to agree with a "model release" that allow the user of the photograph to use it.

Paid, well-paid or not paid, the model has to allow the use of their face or features ("likeness"), and in most cases the calculation of their fee follows the same calculation rule as the photographers: How long, how large publications, how large a size, etc.

Most hired models for advertisement shoots comes with a contracts that automatically add fees for billboard use, television, etc. Like for a photogrpaher, continued use longer than the first agreed period is another fee. I once had two twin girls hired throught a model agency that came for a one hour shoot and was paid for one hour. However, the photo appeared again and again evert month on advertising sent to all Danish households, in television commercials and on outdoor advertisement for years; and each thing was in the contract as something they would get an additional fee for.

For example a doctor that gets a fee of $50,000 for appearing in a television ad is granted another $50,000 if the ad runs again next year. It doesn't matter that he was already paid, and it doesn't matter if it only took him 30 minutes of work to appear in front of a camera.

Apart from people, designs and trademarks also require that you clear their rights if you use them commercially. You cannot freely use a designer chair in an advertisement, and even the lightshow at the Eiffel Tower is copyrighted and cannot be used in a movie, advertisement, etc without clearing rights. .

 

No need for model release for everything else

In the non-commercial context, the people who appear in a photograph doesn't have to sign any model release. A photo used for non-commercial work does not require model release, permission or payment to people in the photograph. The only reason some photographers think they have to ask evert person they photogrpah to sign a model release is that stock agencies require model release so they can sell the photos for commercial use. You can be your own judge if the fee offered by those stock agencies are fair to you and the model, considering that a micro-stock photo may get millions of impressions worldwide whilst you get $3 and the mode gets nothing.

A model release is not needed from peopel who appera in photos that are used non-comercial, and this also include photo books, books, signed fine art prints, etc.

There has been a few court cases where people in "expensive" or "famous" photogprahs wanted a cut when they saw that the work made a lot of money. They lost. I some cases, as the "Afghan Girl" by Steve McCurry (the then 12-year-old Sharbat Gula photographed in a refugee camp by Steve McCurry), National Geographic set up Afghan Girls Fund to "pay back" for the famous photograph.

 

To get a perspective on public photos of people, read this article on several cases in New York Times, "Street photography: A right or invasion?"

Is Germany any different?

As far as things stand now, it is allowed to take photos of people in public in Germany, and to publish them for non-commercial use without a model release. A few widespread cases may have given the idea that it is not. In one case a woman wanted a cut for being in a gallery photo and her lawyer referenced a 1907 law that the right of publishing a photo is owned by the subject of the photo.

 

Country by country

You can see an overview of countries here in the article "Country specific consent requirements" to get into the often very complicated specifics of each country.

 

My conclusion

I haven't really encountered any problems in any country, though the feeling is different from place to place. People in for example Paris and Los Angeles can have a "tired attitude" to being photogparhed in the street, but eve that is a generality becuase you only notice when it haoppens and easily forget all thefriendly people.

Istanbul is one of the most photography-friendly places I've been, much opposite to what I would expect. Muslims, old, young, beautiful, shop owners ... you name it, they all seem to encourage photographs.

So you can't really tell.

What you can tell is that people who are suspicious to you because you have a camera, or who are agressive if you (seem to have) taken a photo of them. My conclusion is very firm on that: Those are the nuts people.

When a security guard in London comes out of his building to enquire on a public street what a group of people with camera are doing, you are dealing with a nuts person. It's not his street, he works in a building nearby and only saw you because his security cameras are pointed in that direction. He has no right, no business asking. Yet he does. Is he nuts? Yes.

When a person yell "stop photographing my dog, you pervert!" it is not you who is a pervert. It's the person that is nuts. It doesnøt matter if you photographed his dog or not, it's something going on in an antire different reality that is at play.

When a woman comes walking towards you (in Berlin) and yells "Verboten!" because you are photogrpahing boys playing football, it's a nuts (and uniformed person).

When a police officer in Washington tells a photographer "Did you take my photo? You should ask before you take my photo" he is uninformed and nuts. You don't have to ask a police officer to take his photo in public. Especially not if he is sitting on a nice looking motor bike. It's a long discussion, but someone said that the biggest crime in the US is not respecting a police officer, and maybe it is.

 

 

Don't discuss and don't delete

Don't discuss with people. When someone asks, "did you just take a photo?" say "Yes" and stay where you are. If you were walking away, keep walking away but answer politely and firm. For some reason a "Yes" closes the discussion. So don't go down the road of "yes, but ... " or "ahm, why?" or start a discussion. Did you take a photo. Yes you did. It's amazing how the truth and fact simply ends whatever it was.

Nobody has the right to ask you to delete a photo. Don't get into the discussion and only (pretend to) delete if the guy is much taller, very angry and is holding a knife. Some times it requires a "yes" as in the above. It has nothing to do with the photo or the eventual consequences of publishing it. You are dealing with a nuts person who insist you delete a photo for reasons a 8 hour discossion wouldn't make clear. Either walk away, or if you like, show it, prss a button so the screen flickers to the the next photo and say "ok!" and leave as it was the smallest thing in the world.

Should you have deleted a photo on you rmemory card, you can always recover it with software. If it's worth it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	Buy the new eBook "A Little Book on Photography" by Thorsten von Overgaard
	Order now - Instant delivery. More info ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★		It's a humorous understatement to call this new eBook by Thorsten Overgaard for "A Little Book on Photography". It's a grand book, a history lesson, life experience, a biography and poetry book and brilliant photo book! All in one beautiful package of 180 pages to fire you up and get you to love photography ... unconditionally! "A Little Book on Photography" eBook for computer, Kindle and iPad. New release March 2017. Intro price only $47 - 180 pages.         Buy Now Instant Delivery

 

 

 

Till then, I hope you enjoyed todays Story Behind That Picture and it made you think about the value of your photographs in more than one sense, as well as your responsibility to create them, preserve them and make them available.

As always, feel free to mail me at thorsten@overgaard.dk with comments, suggesting and questions.

 

A warning: I have also had a few cases where people have asked me waht to do when they signed up to be photographed in a bikini for some tabloid in their teenage years long before anyone thought about the internet. As those photos may appear online, you are suddenly confronted with the question if that is on. It usually is, but just as often you can talk to the photographer and he would understand.

 

Thorsten Overgaard, August 4, 2015