Close
Close

View Poll Results: Do you need a model release to sell an image for commercial use?

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    9 90.00%
  • No

    1 10.00%
  • Maybe

    0 0%
  1. #1
    sk66's Avatar
    sk66 is offline Lovable Contrarian
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Harrisburg, PA
    Posts
    14,966

    Question Do you need a model release if.....#3

    Sports illustrated has contacted you about purchasing one of your pictures for use in their swimsuit calendar...an obvious commercial use. Do you need a model release?

  2. #2
    Jim Bryant's Avatar
    Jim Bryant is offline Stoned Cold Crazy
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    2nd star to the left and straight on until morning
    Posts
    11,466

    Default

    That would be cool, however, normally the shoots are held somewhere exocitic and shot by their contract photographers such as Walter Iooss Jr., Matt Jones, James Macari Derek Kettela because they want consistency by one photographer throughout the swimsuit issue.
    However, Looss gets most of the calendar shoots and that would be one sweet gig.
    http://pa.photoshelter.com/c/jimbryant
    http://jimbryantphotography.blogspot.com/
    (1) EOS 1D MKIII (3) EOS 1D's, (3) EOS1D MKIIs', (1) EOS1Ds MKII, 14mmf2.8, 16-35mmf2.8, 28-70mmf2.8, 70-200mm f2.8, 300mm f2.8 and a 400mmf2.8, (4) 550 EX and 1 580E speedlite, and a Speed a tron studio flash system.

  3. #3
    sk66's Avatar
    sk66 is offline Lovable Contrarian
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Harrisburg, PA
    Posts
    14,966

    Default

    Lol! Regardless of how unlikely the question is still valid. Do you legally need a release to sell an image to someone who wants to use it for commercial purposes?

  4. #4
    Jim Bryant's Avatar
    Jim Bryant is offline Stoned Cold Crazy
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    2nd star to the left and straight on until morning
    Posts
    11,466

    Default

    Why yes you do. SI always have the models sign releases.
    http://pa.photoshelter.com/c/jimbryant
    http://jimbryantphotography.blogspot.com/
    (1) EOS 1D MKIII (3) EOS 1D's, (3) EOS1D MKIIs', (1) EOS1Ds MKII, 14mmf2.8, 16-35mmf2.8, 28-70mmf2.8, 70-200mm f2.8, 300mm f2.8 and a 400mmf2.8, (4) 550 EX and 1 580E speedlite, and a Speed a tron studio flash system.

  5. #5
    paiges's Avatar
    paiges is offline rockstar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,282

    Default

    What about street photography?
    Paige

    "Those who don't believe in magic will never find it." ~Roald Dahl


    My flickr

  6. #6
    dakwegmo's Avatar
    dakwegmo is offline instigator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    2,239

    Default

    SI will require it as a condition of sale because of how they intend to use it, but that doesn't mean it's legally required for the transaction to occur.
    [ԯ] marcus
    photoblog | Facebook | flickr | 5∞ px | G+

  7. #7
    sk66's Avatar
    sk66 is offline Lovable Contrarian
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Harrisburg, PA
    Posts
    14,966

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dakwegmo View Post
    SI will require it as a condition of sale because of how they intend to use it, but that doesn't mean it's legally required for the transaction to occur.
    Ding DIng Ding! Winner!

    The photographer does not need a release to sell the image to ANYONE. However, without a release the image is of little value in the commercial market. Since SI is producing the calendar THEY need the release...that's why the wording of any release needs to have wording of some sort that allows the "transfer" of those rights to another entity. This is usually accomplished by wording like "sub-licensable," or "any media."

    The only way you, as the photographer, could get into trouble is if you sold the image with the indication that you did have a release when you didn't. If the entity produced the product using your image and without verifying/receiving the release THEY would be in violation of the model's rights, not you. But the company *could* attempt to come back on you for misrepresenting the image... In the case of SI the courts would laugh because they certainly know better... In any legal case (with equal lawyers) it is the individual/entity doing the action that is responsible for knowing/abiding by the laws applying to their actions.

    But lawyers are never "equal." Fat wallet always wins.
    Last edited by sk66; 01-15-2013 at 12:09 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in