A bit off topic now, about photos of people without their consent like in street photo or even models who may claim they didn't know how the photo would be used I found this interisting in the text. This is a plug-in translation so it is not perfect clear. It seems to be allowed to sell photos of people as art. I am not sure if I got it wrong:
Does it means that if it is considered work of art it is ok to publish or even sell? Or I got it wrong?
"Images may be publicly displayed disseminated only with the consent of the person portrayed or. The consent is in doubt as granted if the person portrayed that he allowed himself to reflect, received a reward. After the death of the person depicted is required to expiration of ten years, the consent of the relatives of the person portrayed. Members under this Act, the surviving spouse or domestic partner and children of the person depicted, and if neither a spouse or life partner children are still present, the parents of the person portrayed. "
KunstUrhG counts exceptions:
(1) Without the consent required
by § 22 may be distributed and showcased
Portraits from the realm of contemporary history;
Pictures where the people only as accessory appear next to a landscape or other location;
Pictures of meetings, elevators and similar events in which the people depicted have participated;
Images that are not made to order, unless the distribution or ostentation serves a higher interest of art.
(2) The authority does not extend to spread and ostentation, through a legitimate interest of the person portrayed or, if he has died, his family is hurt.
PS: No, I don't plan to sell or publish street photographs. I just got curious.
That's a really rough translation, so if you're seriously concerned, I would speak to a German intellectual property/copyright lawyer about this to get clarification. But it sounds similar in principle to the law here in the US - if someone is in public, performing a public action, they have no expectation of privacy and you don't need their permission to photograph them. You don't need a model release even if the person is recognizable so long as the work is not being used for commercial purposes. Commercial purposes can be generally understood to mean for the purpose of advertising or endorsing a product or service. So publication in a catalog of photos or exhibition and sale in an art gallery would not require a model release. Putting that photo on a can of Maxwell House coffee, or on a billboard for Joe's Car Repair, would require the release. The German law sounds a little more restrictive, and a little more specific as to the conditions, but not radically different. I'd talk to an expert in local law who knows for sure what the law means and knows case history as to how it has been interpreted. There is probably an organization somewhere in your state, if not a national one, where lawyers who specialize in this kind of law will provide free or inexpensive consultations for artists. Look them up and get advice there. Otherwise, the legal advice you get from an internet chat forum is worth exactly what you paid for it.
I am serious broken no with the surgery I have to do and moving. But as soon as I get some spare money (if I get) I will check it with a lawyer.
Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera
With the exception of the un-highlighted advice, which is very valuable!
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2
As I said, while I don't know of anyone specific in your area, I would be surprised if there were not a FREE legal advocacy group for artists in Germany that would have a lawyer who could answer this question for you, or maybe even have a pamphlet or guide that discusses this, because it would be a very common question. Or perhaps there is a professional association for photographers in Germany that would be willing to explain something like this, also for free. Here in the US we have the ASMP (American Society for Media Professionals, nee American Society of Magazine Photographers). I would be shocked if there isn't a DSMP equivalent. I'd post an inquiry about such organizations over on APHOG.de to see if someone can refer you to the proper groups.
Originally Posted by marciofs
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Marcio, don't bother with lawyers for now. Just get in touch with some other German photographers that shoot models and they'll likely can point you to a simple but adequate model release in German. I shoot models and always have them sign a release. It doesn't cost anything and it may avoid trouble in the future. I've also done a workshop in Berlin and the release that was used there was basically a German version of what I use here in Canada in English without any difficult legal language. It basically stated the full names and date of birth of the photographer (me) and the model, that the model was compensated (paid) for her service and that the photographer has the copyright of the pictures. In this particular case it also stated that the pictures could not be used for commercial purposes. Dated and signed by both.
Model-Kartei is a big German model photo site. Here you can easily search for photographers in your area that speak English and/or Italian.
Got to http://www.model-kartei.de/sedcards/fotograf/suchen/
Select Land: Deutschland and Ort: Freiburg
scroll down a bit and click on the tab "Gesprochene Sprachen" and click on Englisch and/or Italienisch.
There's 2 photographers in Freiburg that claim to speak Italian and 82 that speak English. Don't expect them to be all fluent though.
But you definitely need to learn German.
Legally it is not sufficient that the photographer states that his work is art nor that he intends to make art, but that his work IS art.
Does it means that if it is considered work of art it is ok to publish or even sell?
In case of a dispute most probably a official expert would be asked...
You are wrong, concening german law.
Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera
Thank you for the suggestion TheFlyingCamera.
And thank you for the links spijker.
I never learned that there is a definition which other can use to decide what is or not art rather the the creator intention and use.
That's why I said that A: this is the practice in the US, B: I'm not a lawyer, C: I don't know German law, and D: consult someone who does know German law for legal advice in Germany.
Originally Posted by AgX