Quote Originally Posted by blansky
I believe a person who uses a photographer for pictures and signs a release then loses all control over the use of the pictures.
Not quite. There was a landmark case where a model posed for what she understood to be "Bedding" - matresses, sheets, etc., advertisements. She was paid, as agreed, signed the usual model release - and found her image on a number of "XXX" rated Video Casette boxes at her local Video Rental Place a few months later.

She sued, claiming a breach of Good Faith (an essential element in all contracts) and WON BIG, and immediately.

A model release is a contract allowing the use of one's image within the bounds of legality and "good faith" - not a license for the holder to run roughshod over anyone.

I'm wondering about this entire deal. Didn't the same thing happen to Madonna ... and that worked out very well for her ... I know that Madonna's PR people had a few discussions about her early nude photos, and their final decision was "So what?".

BTW ... when I sell a photograph I'll always send a cut of the proceeds to the model... as a token of "good faith".