Negotiating release?

[Eastree]

I went to a State park with some friends a while back. the park's web site has 4 images in its gallery, all of a wedding and none of its trails which it brags about so much. So I was the one tasked with contacting the park asking about submitting photographs for consideration.

The response was a model release. There is only one image with a person out of everyone's. As for the others, should we register copyright on the images before submitting them?

And should we draft our own release, requiring credit and copyright be posted for the photographers of each photo?

No one will be charging the park; it's more for a love of nature and a lack of it on the park's web site.

Any way, the main question is: would it be wise/whatever to draft a release for our photos which do not include people, saying we will not submit without compliance to those things? I'm thinking the park would simply refuse since the State would not have full release of the image (copyright etc.)

[OsmosisStudios]

Generally the state will want a full release: you can draft a copyright release of your own (and have it checked our by a lawyer) but chances are they wont even bother if they cant have unlimited use.

[Eastree]

Well, the thing is all they sent is a model release. For the most part, there are no people in the images to release; it's all just trails, trees, and scenery.

All the State has offered it model release. For the rest, should we draft our own or make the request?

[nokiN]

A model release, a copyright transfer, and a 'work-or-hire' agreement are all separate legal documents in the US. (a work-for-hire agreement gives copyright ownership to the entity that hired the photographer, or is effective if images are made as part of regular duties for an employeer and is stated so in a document signed by both parties.)

Both work-for-hire agreements and copyright transfers have to be signed by both parties to be legally effective.

A model release protects people in animage from having their likeness being used to endorse/promote things or products without their permission. It also protects the publisher of an image if the people in the image have given permission for the use of their likeness, but later change their minds.

I would provide a no-charge, limited use license while retaining copyright ownership.

[nokiN]

Originally Posted by Eastree

Well, the thing is all they sent is a model release. For the most part, there are no people in the images to release; it's all just trails, trees, and scenery.

All the State has offered it model release. For the rest, should we draft our own or make the request?

The fact that all they sent was their own model release means they expect you to retain copyright ownership of the images.

You will need a properly executed copy of their model release signed by each recognisable person in each image. Make copies of the unsigned release they sent you (so you have plenty) and make copies to retain of any release you get signed. Send the original signed releases to the state along with the images or write the appropriate file name on the corresponding release document if you are sending/uploading digital files of the images.

If one person is in 3 images, you need 3 signed model releases from that person. If there are 3 people in one image, each person will need to sign their own release.