model releases?

[bsphoto]

There was a post about whether or not a photographer needed to get a

model release for certain pictures they had taken and wanted to

sell. I was wondering when should a model release be used? also i

work alot with dogs and am looking to sell some of the images, does

anyone know if i one need a model release for the dog and two if i

do need a model release for a dog/animal what needs to be included

thats different from say a human model release?

[dai_hunter]

For pets, as well as things like cars and boats, the release you should use is more like a "property" release than a "model" release that you would use for human subjects.

 

The content of a property release would include most features of a conventional model release: who (released); for what purpose / uses; under what circumstances; any limitations; and for what compensation; ect. Because working with animals that can bite, kick, and otherwise can be dangerous in some circumstances; as well as they can get hurt themselves or even run off; such a release may also contain provisions such as hold harmless and indemnity clauses in favour of the owner.

 

There should be some examples on line.

[rubens_abboud]

Bryan,

<p>It is always safer to get a release when possible, but even releases will not stop someone from sueing you. Like most situations involving the law, the whole matter of model/property releases is a grey area.</p>

<p>Editorial uses (magazine articles, newspapers, etc.) usually do not require releases, assuming you were making images in a public location.</p>

<p>Commercial uses (i.e. promoting a product/service) of recognizable subjects do require a release.</p>

<p>If you are making dog portraits, you are safer getting property releases from the owner (who must be of legal age).</p>

<p>Best regards,</p>

<p>Rubens.<br>

<a href="http://www.TheImageNation.com">Travel stock photography at www.TheImageNation.com</a><br>

</p>