Propery release?

<p>Howdy. </p>

<p>Recently, I put together a composite (it used to be called a multiple exposure) of several bars / restaurants in NYC. I like the finished product, and will put it on my wall (and on the Wednesday Nikon thing). I'm wondering if I can offer it for sale to the locales in the image. I'm thinking the owners or managers may want a large version, for display or sale. There are probably a dozen neon signs in the image. Will I need property realeases from each, in order to sell the shot? </p>

<p>By the way, I realize that the legal advice I receive here is worth exactly what I pay for it. Thanks for your help!</p>

<p>No need for any releases if it was all viewable from a public place. </p>

<p>If you're selling it <em>as art</em> it's generally not an issue. If you or one of the venues start thinking in terms of using the image as part of marketing material, then you have to consider the issue, as well as possible trademark issues (with logos and whatnot).</p>

<p>Martin is only suggesting selling prints. With regard to the logos and trademarks... They are put up in public for a very good reason. Because they want people to see them and if they appear in prints hanging on people's walls - even better!</p>

<p>There would only be a problem if there was mis-representation or the company was shown in a defammatory way.</p>

<p>There is not a *single* case I am aware of, where a property owner has prevailed in courts based on lack of a "property release".<br>

Look at those two recent ones. In the first, the image was prominently used for advertising. In the second, the photographer took the image while trespassing.<br>

http://www.propertyintangible.com/2010/08/houses-right-of-publicity.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+PropertyIntangible+%28Property,+intangible%29&utm_content=Bloglines<br>

http://www.photoattorney.com/?p=447</p>