Copyright and model release advice.

[sdjl]

I'm after some advice.

Recently, a theatre that I work at published a new brochure which had a page set aside for information about their band nights. I gave them a series of photos that I'd taken at some of their nights. They were watermarked and resampled to a low resolution under the assumption that they would ask for a larger size, and my permission to use the photos.

This week I find they've used two of my photos on a brochure mail out that reaches around 10,000 people. Whilst they have credited my photos on the page, they didn't ask for permission and have cropped the photos down to remove the watermarks.

The other thing that needs to be pointed out is that one of the photos features a performer whose under 18. I didn't gain any model release at the time and had no intention of publishing these photos or selling them for gain.

Where do I stand with regards to not having a model release and this shot being used publicly? Am I liable as I took the photo, even though the photo was used without my permission?

I've got a basic letter drafted up about the use of copyrighted images without permission, but I want to see if I can put something in about the theatre being liable for any backlash about the use of a photo containing a minor.

Your thoughts and suggestions are greatly appreciated.

David

[wulf]

To be sure, you need the opinion of a suitably qualified lawyer and that will probably cost.

However, I would imagine that a note about the potential problems of having used the images, noting that they were passed on as an example, not as a finished product, should cover you. It would be better if you had something written down from when you passed them on in the first place but am I right in guessing that was an informal "helping out" gesture? Even an email saying "take a look at these and, if they are useful, we can talk about full-scale ones suitable for publication" or something along those lines might be helpful.

Wulf

[sdjl]

Hi wulf,

I didn't pass on a note because most of the people I know reasonably well. I've been helping out by taking photos in the hope that they would want to use some for a bit more explosure. The photos they used are the only ones I took at an under 18's event. I decided to stop taking photos at any more under 18's based nights due to me not knowing where I stood with photographing minors.

Assumptions are a bad thing to make and I must say I've learnt a good lesson now.

David

[Saralonde]

I can't speak to the legalities, but you may have to put your watermark directly across the center of the image from now on. You also said "under the asumption" which perhaps left it unclear whether or not they could use them. If they had asked to use them, would you have gone back for the model's ok? Maybe you can do that after the fact.
The only thing I know about model releases are in these threads:

• model releases
• Model releases...Is it really needed?

[sdjl]

Thanks for the links. I've had a little look around and most places seem to say that the publisher is ultimately the liable person.

If they had asked to use them then I would have explained there were no model releases and that they'd have to contact the band to get a release before I gave them full size images.