Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,928   Posts: 1,585,182   Online: 695
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    JDP
    JDP is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bedfordshire, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    75

    legalities relating to 'model release forms' in the UK

    I have a question regarding when a 'model release form' is required within the UK. Googleing around it seems that if you take a picture (anywhere) in which an individual is 'clearly recognizable' then you have to obtain their permission before you can 'publish' the picture (otherwise, I assume, they could sue you for damages).

    Are there any experts on APUG that can confirm or advise on this? On the face of it this is very restrictive. Street photography is the obvious example. Are street photographers taking a risk?!

    There appears to be a get-out clause for press photographers. If the picture is considered a news item then it is not covered by the legislation.

  2. #2
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,435
    Images
    148
    If the person is not an implicit part of the image then it's debatable whether a release is necessary. It really depends on the use of a photograph, if it's being used for advertising then there's definite issues because many people stand to profit from the image, however bystanders etc in public places aren't an issue for publication in a newspaper/magazine or book.

    Model release for advertising, verbal or written permission for anything else. Even then I've never used a model release, if a model's being paid and told what the images are for then it's implicit anyway there's a verbal contract, at that stage there may be an agreement that additional fees will be paid for other uses.

    Ian

  3. #3
    wclark5179's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    505
    I error on the side of caution and always get a model release. It's contained in my contracts but I also get one if I use photographs that will be available for public viewing. If you're selling photographs, suggest always get a signed release. Of course, my primary photography focus is with people. I post very few photographs on my web site as I consider them private; they are for my clients. That's me; it's my philosophy, my way of doing business.

    Why not get a model release? Is it hard to obtain? You may never need it, however, if you are, heaven forbid, taken to court and you don't have a release, then what?

    Children are tricky. Suggest getting a release signed by both parents.

    Years ago I never thought to take these measures but today, it's a different story.

    Hope this helps you.
    Bill Clark

  4. #4
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,712
    Images
    122
    You don't need any sort of permission or agreement to just take a picture - especially from a public place. The only time a release will actually be needed is if there is some sort of dispute and you need to prove that you have permission to use the image in a particular way.

    There is no legal requirement as such.

    However, some stock agencies/image libraries will cover themselves by insisting upon a model release for any recognisable person in an image.

    Some UK relevant guidance here:

    http://www.sirimo.co.uk/wp-content/u...srights-v2.pdf

    http://www.urban75.org/photos/photog...-shooting.html




    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  5. #5
    dainmcgowan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    26
    Images
    6
    you can take pictures of anybody, and even publish and sell without the need of a model release form.
    if this wasn't true, then the paparazzo could not exist.

    the only time you need a model release form is for advertising a product or election campaigns etc etc.

  6. #6
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,712
    Images
    122
    Model releases are similar to contracts. If everything goes smoothly, no one will ever need to look at it. It's only when something goes wrong or differently to one party's expectations that the contract and or release is needed to see what was actually agreed upon.


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  7. #7
    JDP
    JDP is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bedfordshire, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    75
    Thanks for the replies, especially the links from Steve. Reading those it seems views differ. The first article is quite cautious and paints a difficult picture for a street photographer, the second one is more relaxed about it and seems to say 'it should be ok', though does mention model release forms. I guess there is no one answer, and at the end of the day any dispute would be decided in court....

  8. #8
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,087
    Quote Originally Posted by dainmcgowan View Post
    you can take pictures of anybody, and even publish and sell without the need of a model release form.
    if this wasn't true, then the paparazzo could not exist.

    the only time you need a model release form is for advertising a product or election campaigns etc etc.

    The paparazzo thing is based on the person being of "public interest", which is an exclusion to the right of controlling the publishing of ones image.
    At least within german legislature, and seemnigly elsewhere.

  9. #9
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,712
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by AgX View Post
    The paparazzo thing is based on the person being of "public interest", which is an exclusion to the right of controlling the publishing of ones image.
    At least within german legislature, and seemnigly elsewhere.
    In the UK there is no legal definition of 'public interest' or 'celebrity' or anything similar. Everyone is treated as equal by the law.


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  10. #10
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,087
    I am surprised!! But then those paparazzi should have a problem.

    But the OP's issue is different anyway. It is about taking photographs of ordinary people in the streets of the UK and publishing them.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin