Jump to content

Right to publish


rgans

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<blockquote>

<p>Can you explain further? What, specifically, does a model release do for you in this circumstance?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, for one it could prevent you from potentially getting sued. The OP did not provide a lot of details, and his example is a hypothetical one. (his words: "<strong>just making this part up</strong>") So it's going to be hard to give him any detailed advice since laws will vary depending on the circumstances.</p>

<p>Is the person a celebrity or just an "everyday joe"? Where was the picture taken, on a public street? At a concert/event? At the shopping mall? Was he hired to take the picture? If so by whom? Did he even take the photograph in question? (he just says he <em>owns</em> one, not that he <em>took</em> one) There are a lot of variables involved and probably just as many opinions. In the end it would probably be best to consult with a laywer.</p>

<p>But a simplified version without knowing all the details would be to say cover your rear-end and get a model release.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>If I own a <a href="../business-photography-forum/00Wu2Z" target="_blank">photograph</a> of a living person,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, you strike out there too. Bettie Page died in December of 2008. I can assume you did not take the picture yourself. If you do not own the rights to the photograph then no you can not make a poster and sell it (legally)</p>

<p>Now if you own the<strong> negative </strong>to the photo, you might be able to argue that you have the rights, but I'd check with a laywer first.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Hopefully the OP knows whether he has copyright to the picture or not (reference to the negatives fairly irrelevant here). He said he owns the photograph.</p>

<p>If she's dead, then even less need for a model release. The chances of her suing for damage to her reputation decrease significantly...</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>He could still face legal issues from her estate. "Usually" the owner of the negatives can claim copyright ownership, but of course that's not a "cure all" either.</p>

<p>I own a photo of Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher, you think Lucas would let me make and sell posters of that pic just because I own a photo?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>"Usually" the owner of the negatives can claim copyright ownership, but of course that's not a "cure all" either.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Errr, no, US law is like UK law here, in that the 'author' of the photos is the copyright holder unless they have given away copyright. It isn't a question of whoever happens to hold the negatives. Unless you're thinking of old copyright law some decades ago. You can read a summary of US copyright law in Wikipedia <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_copyright_law">here</a>.</p>

<p>The OP says he owns the photographs, but which he presumably means has copyright in them, so it's not relevant to this thread anyway.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>He could still face legal issues from her estate.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>More specifically, what legal issues did you have in mind?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I own a photo of Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher, you think Lucas would let me make and sell posters of that pic just because I own a photo?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In the UK you would, unless you're using them to endorse a product. Is there some wrinkle in US law that means that Lucas could stop you printing your own photos?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Is there some wrinkle in US law that means that Lucas could stop you <a href="../business-photography-forum/00Wu2Z?start=10" target="_blank">printing</a> your own photos?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ah, but that's just my point. I never said I took the photo. I just said I own a photo. Just as the OP has stated. He never said he took the photo, he just owns a photo, or a copy of a photo (it's unclear which)</p>

<p>Ownership of a photo in and of itself does not imply ownership of copyrights. We don't know who took the picture. Did his father take it? Did his father purchase it from someone else? The origin of the photo is unclear/unknown. If he's really serious about trying to sell posters to make some bucks off of this picture he's found, he's best suited talking to a laywer first.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Errr, yes it does. Ownership of a photo means owning copyright in it. Owning a print just means owning a print</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Seriously? Are you kidding me?<br />pho·to·graph; an image produced on light-sensitive film or array inside a camera, <strong>especially a print or slide made from the processed image</strong>, or a reproduction in a newspaper, magazine, or book</p>

<p><br />Synonyms: <a onmousedown="return si_T('&ID=domain,122.1')" href="http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+photo&form=DTPDIO">photo</a>, <a onmousedown="return si_T('&ID=domain,124.1')" href="http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+picture&form=DTPDIO">picture</a>, <a onmousedown="return si_T('&ID=domain,126.1')" href="http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+snap&form=DTPDIO">snap</a>, <a onmousedown="return si_T('&ID=domain,128.1')" href="http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+shot&form=DTPDIO">shot</a>, <a onmousedown="return si_T('&ID=domain,130.1')" href="http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+snapshot&form=DTPDIO">snapshot</a>, <a onmousedown="return si_T('&ID=domain,132.1')" href="http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+print&form=DTPDIO">print</a></p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>that the 'author' of the photos is the copyright holder unless they have given away copyright</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Exactly, so he's not the author. So there's no claim to ownership of the copyright. He owns a photograph, or a print. He does not have authorship rights simply by owning a print. <br /><br />To the OP - Get a laywer.<br />Done.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>To the OP - Get a laywer.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't think he needs a lawyer. Ownership of the copyright should be very obvious to him. If he took the photograph and hasn't assigned the copyright to anyone else then the copyright is his.<br>

If he didn't take the photograph and he hasn't had the copyright assigned to him then the copyright is not his.<br>

No point paying a lawyer stupid money to work out something obvious which you know the answer to already.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The OP stated:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If I own a photograph of a living person, say, Paul McCartney (just making this part up), can I create and sell a poster from this photograph?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I was interpreting that as him taking a picture of a picture and making/selling a poster of that second-generation picture. I would automatically say that he cannot do that because he does not own the copyright of the original picture. In exactly the same way that you cannot photocopy a book and sell it as your own.</p>

<p>I remember a rather heated discussion (on Luminous Landscape I think) about a photographer who was taking pictures of posters (that is, other people's work) that had been put on the site on the side of buses; but his pictures were not just of the poster, there was a small part of the picture that was the wheel arch of the bus. The discussion raged from copyright issues through lack of origianlity to artistic integrity.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>If you want to read up on some general purpose copyright and publication facts, rather than debate a hypothetical problem, I would recommend that you review some of the FAQs and pamphlets over at copyright.gov. They're easy to read, and cover a lot of ground quickly. They won't make you an expert, but there are a lot of answers about publication, ownership and copying in those web pages. </p>

<p>Try this link: http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Simon is obviously using the word "photo" in the context of an image rather than a physical object. Everyone else seems to understand this</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, I know what context Simon was using the word in. However, the OP is clearly referring to an actual object, or print. That's the reason for the rest of the post I made that you didn't quote. To explain that "photo" in the context of this discussion was of a physical object.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>not Luc's 'you need a model release'.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Do you only read the parts of my posts that you want to read? That was the first post I made, without any other knowledge from the OP other than "<em>I have a photo of a person can I make and sell a poster</em>"</p>

<p>I even stated after more information was provided:</p>

<blockquote>

<p> If you do not own the rights to the photograph then no you can not make a poster and sell it (legally)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I thought that was pretty clear until some people decided to argue the point further...</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>However, the OP is clearly referring to an actual object, or print.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You were still going on about having problems from the model's estate well after the OP's last post.</p>

<p>The OP hasn't said anything about referring to an actual object or print, this is something you've changed your mind about and decided is a fact without any input from the OP. If that is what the OP was 'clearly referring to', then you've changed your mind about it for no apparent reason.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>without any other knowledge from the OP other than "<em>I have a photo of a person can I make and sell a poster</em>"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The OP hasn't given us any more information than that, yet, his only other post was to say:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>In this case, there is no model release. The person in the photograph is Betty Page (don't ask why I didn't mention that before). The photo is fairly old and it was posed.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>and</p>

<blockquote>Thanks. Appreciate all this</blockquote>

<p>Obviously, we all interpreted that as a photo taken by the OP which he took/has copyright in, and answered accordingly. If the OP means something else, he can say so.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...