flower girl's mother said I did not get her permission to use her daughter's photo... did I need to?

<p>I shot a wedding a couple of months ago and the couple signed a contract that states that I am allowed to use the photos from the wedding for promotional and advertising use. The flower girls mother just sent me an email telling me to remove a photo of her daughter from my online portfolio and that she never gave me permission to use her daughter's photo. Did I need to get permission from her? She saw me take the photos, and never said a word to me at the wedding. The girl was the flower girl and was going to have her picture taken no matter what. There is nothing on the photo that says the name of the child or anything like that. I am a parent so I do understand that she may not want her children's photos up all over the internet, but my daughter has been the flower girl in 3 weddings. I knew and expected her photos to be used in a photographers portfolio or displayed somewhere on the photographer's website. I also have never been asked by a photographer at any of those weddings to sign a release.<br>

I don't really know what to do, I would just take it down and I probably will to make her happy but I like the photo and I want to know if I had the right to use it in the first place. If not I will take it down immediately.</p>

<p>Thanks for your help.</p>

The bride and groom cannot sign away the rights of the flower girl. This is based on US law. You need to take them down or have the mother sign a release.

 

The law does get a bit sticky, because a wedding is often considered a public place, therefore people can expect to be photographed. It's not worth the stress or the money to figure out your rights through an attorney.

 

It is wise to take the images down off of your site.

<p>Maybe try to reason with her. If you're nice enough, you may not only get permission but possibly a client. I have a flower girl photo I haven't posted yet, but I was working for another photographer at the time, and have no specific rights at all; it was going to be a fingers crossed situation that I never heard from the mom! Try not to be defensive, but more complimentary, because it really is flattery that you chose that photo!</p>

<p>I'm sorry, but the idea that you should throw an image up and hope not to hear from someone whose permission you need is beyond nonsense.</p>

<p>Tara, as Bob pointed out, the bride and groom cannot give you permission to use any image that contains a person's likeness other than the couple. So, unless the bride IS the flower girl's mother, you have to remove the image. In fact, it should never have been posted at all.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>She saw me take the photos, and never said a word to me at the wedding. The girl was the flower girl and was going to have her picture taken no matter what.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The purpose of a photographer shooting pictures at a wedding is not to build your portfolio, it's to capture the day for the couple. If I go to a wedding and my table at the reception is photographed, my expectation is that the images may or may not be used in the couple's wedding album. I have no expectation, nor should I, that the images will end up being used commercially.</p>

<p>You had no right to use it in the first place (for that particular usage) and should pull it immediately.</p>

<p>If the picture is really good, then here's what I would do: knowing that the mother is not wanting her daughter's image on the internet, ask if I can use the image in a print portfolio instead. I may not actually need such permission based on the right of privacy/right to publicity laws of the state I live in (or shot the wedding in) but, in this case, I would definitely ask for, and receive, permission.</p>

<p>If she says 'no' then don't use the image.</p>

<p>Remember, beyond the legality of whether or not you can use it, wedding photography is an industry where word-of-mouth is a critical form of advertising and you want to stop this mother from spreading a bad word.</p>

<p>I agree with Bob and Rob...........also, remember that P-net is a public forum and anyone that googles your name will see this thread referenced. Welcome to P-net.</p>

<p>Thank you for all your help and I will remove the image and then ask her to use it in a print portfolio, which I use as well.</p>

<p>Unless the image is being used to explicitly or imply the indorsement of a product, service or cause the image can be used without permission. The image was taken where there was no reasonable expectation of privacy. Using the image to promote your business is not the same as having the person in the image endorse your business. The image is an example of your work, the girl is not endorsing your work.</p>

<p>In spite of what people think an image taken where there is no expectation of privacy allows that image to be displayed or used as long as it is not endorsing or promoting a service or cause. A wedding is not a location where a reasonable expectation of privacy would be considered. The mother does not have a leg to stand on and you can go tell her to pound sand as there is nothing the mother can do. She will never find a lawyer to take the case and a small claims suit would be tossed in your favor. As the mother to cite the specific law that she is claiming you are violating. Just because the mother thinks it is against the law does not make it against the law.</p>

<p>But do you really want the mother bad mouthing you to everyone she finds? The mother is clueless but that will not stop her from telling her other clueless friends. Your best recourse is to remove the image or mask the face. Don't even seek permission from the mother as the mother is probably going to ask for money.</p>

<p>Well Tara, after reading Rob's post and Raymond's post, you should now be coming to see why it's best not to ask what is essentially a question of law on a photographer's forum. And if you do, remember that the answers come from people who are wholly unqualified. </p>

<p>Also bear in mind that the vehemence with which a point of view is stated and the strength of language used to express it bears no relationship to the correctness of the answer.</p>

<p>Agree with Alec 100%. Oh, and my step-son is a 2nd year law student. Does that mean my comments should be given more wieght? Um...... no. :-)</p>

<p>Using the image as an example of your work, on your website or in a print portfolio or on your wall, etc., promotes your business. While there may be subtle differences from state to state as to what you can do without explicit permission, generally speaking, portfolio or website uses are commercial. A gallery that is used to display/sell the images can use the images - an image can be used to sell itself. If the use is artistic/editorial, the use doesn't require a release (like the local fishwrap running a series of shots of the Jones wedding on the society pages, etc.)</p>

<p>You need to find out the way the laws work in your state when it comes down to the details. But no state that I'm aware of allows anyone but the individual (or parents, etc., for minor children) to sign off on that individual's privacy/publicity rights.</p>

<p>There really are two questions here - usage and privacy.</p>

<p>The usage question will be debated endlessly - as to whether or not using a photo in a portfolio is "commerical" or an "endorsement" - As Craig and others have pointed out - only the subject or the parent / guardian can sign away the usage rights for a photo - meaning bride and groom can't sign away anyone else's rights. </p>

<p>The second is one of privacy - we as a society are especially in tune with the usage of "minors" and the photography of the same in any setting. Parents are always on the lookout for images of their children on the web and are very sensitive to images of their children a) being taken and or b) being shown - for any purpose - on the web. Did the mother forfeit the right / expectation of privacy by having her daughter be a flower girl in the wedding? Debatable - since, unless the wedding was in a public park or other "public" location, it was probably an invitation only event.</p>

<p>I'd say that about 90% of us (wedding photographers) have wording in our contract that says something to the effect of - we reserve the right to use the photos in promotion / publicity of our business. In 5 years of doing weddings / events, only once has a client (a lawyer no less) stricken / struck that provision from my contract prior to signing it. 99% of the time - the parents or subjects of a photo either don't know the law or don't care about it. And I'd go even further and say that 99% of the time - the 1% that do know the law and rules aren't going to say anything about it to you anyhow.</p>

<p>So - you got the .01% of the population that knows the rules and said something about it! I think you're taking the right approach by pulling the photo and talking to her. Maybe a print or two for her would be enough to sway her to allow you to use the photo. </p>

<p>Of course the other, darker possibility is that there are legal or personal issues as to why she doesn't want her daughter's photo on line. I've had cases where I was told not to talk photos of certain competitors at events or if I did to not post them due to restraining orders and custodial issues.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

<p> </p>

<p>You could leave the photo up and just blur the face of the flower girl with photoshop.</p>

<p><strong><em>The flower girls mother just sent me an email telling me to remove a photo of her daughter from my online portfolio and that she never gave me permission to use her daughter's photo. </em></strong></p>

<p>This is really a non-issue. Why would anyone argue with a mother wanting her child's photo removed from public view? (Even if you have every right to show it). Should you refrain from ever doing it again? Of course not. Just take this one down right away and tell her you understand.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I agree with RT Jones ... why drag it into the shark tank and chum the waters? Just remove it and let go at that.</p>

<p>Doesn't mean never put up another image for your portfolio because you didn't get releases from all 200 people at the wedding. If that ever becomes the case, then all wedding portfolio photos will be of the B&G only, with everyone else blurred out like they were in the Witness Protection Program or something ... LOL!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I agree with Raymond.</p>

<p>I agree with RT. If someone doesn't want thier kid's face posted on the Internet, the respectful thing to do is either remove the face from the photo (blur the face, mask the kid out, crop the photo, etc), or take it down.</p>

<p>Remembering that the business is largely based on referrals; you should ask yourself, is it worth it to anger a possible future MOTB over a single photo that you want to use in your portfolio and self-endorsement.</p>

<p>Then answer should be clear.</p>

<p>The California case of KNB Enterprises v. Gregory W. Matthews discusses federal copyright pre-emption issues in the context of endorsement vs. non-endorsement use as to rights of privacy/publicity. Read carefully, very carefully.</p>

<p>An easier read is Montana v. San Jose Mercury News, Inc. (California 1995) where, among some bigger issues, a newspaper had right to republish stories (including a picture of a sports figure) in commercial manner to show the quality of its work product. This is the closest I have seen yet on the issue (in California at least).</p>

<p>yes blur the face or all of her if its the background. as silly as it sounds the person has to be without reasonable doubt ID'able and bluring solves this.</p>

<p><em>bluring solves this.</em></p>

<p>In a 'we had to destroy the village in order to save the village' kind of way. Bluring will destroy the whole point of using the image.</p>

<p>I agree with RT, but I like Marc's answer - paragraph 2! I vote for Marc. :o)</p>

<p>John -</p>

<p>I was waiting for you to weigh in on this... thank you. </p>

<p>Although she legally has the right to use the image for promotion, based on precidence, she probably would get better word of mouth publicity by doing as the mother asks. </p>

<p>Although - that too is going down a slippery slope, since the mother will now think that she is right... sigh...</p>

<p>Perhaps something along the lines of "Legally I don't have to remove the image, but I will in this case since it is causing you concern." or perhaps even better worded...but conveying a similar message.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>Thank you all for your responses! I really do appreciate them! I never thought I would get so many because I just joined after lurking for like 2 years (sorry). I removed the photo and was leaning toward doing it when I asked the question because of what some people mentioned.. word of mouth. I didn't want to upset her. I never meant to. I kinda just wanted to see if I "had to" by law or anything.. or if I was breaking this huge rule I was unaware of. I always thought that they were aware that a photographer might end up using the photo for something. I will be more aware now and will ask parents next time. I always ask about portfolio usage when I do portraits but this was a wedding. This is the first time I have ever delt with someone asking me to remove something. I have had some other events that they requested the photos not be used for my portfolio and I of course followed their wishes!</p>

<p>What about a photo of the bride and groom and the flower girl is in it? Can the mother ask the photographer to take it down? Or if it is from the back of the child so the face is not facing the camera, should the photographer take it down if the mother asks him/her to? I mean from legal standpoint and not business standpoint.</p>

<p>"Unless the image is being used to explicitly or imply the indorsement of a product, service or cause the image can be used without permission." <strong>But</strong> a minor child use-of-image requires a signed release by a parent or guardian. <strong>Or</strong> you may take your chances -- the cost of a lawyer for a concrete answer would be a valid business expense, along with anything a judge might award if the girl's mother decides to find her own lawyer.</p>

<p>As noted above, remove the image. Then contact the flower girl's mother and see if anything can be worked out.</p>

<p> </p>