my face got published in an ad, what to do

[mysteryscribe]

It's a rather sad commentary on life all the way around.

 

[ksmattfish]

So since as MARKC put it there was a waiver on the application! However, my mother who ran with me and is on the picture did not sign any waiver becuase it was too late to register, so we just started running!

So in other words, your Mom didn't follow the rules, which was to register if she wanted to participate. There was probably an insurance waiver there too; if she had twisted her ankle would you sue? Consider that the sponsers of this event (Run for Cure) probably contribute more to the cause than the run itself generates. When they are sued for this sort of thing, or hasseled in general, it makes them think twice about participating next time. You need to understand that any money your action requires to solve, or in monetary damages you recieve, probably eventually come out of the funds for "the Cure" rather than any particular advertisers' pockets. You may be within your rights, but it's something to think about.

 

[markc]

Thanks for the update. I have to agree with Matt. I know it sucks for your and your mom to be surprised by this, but that's what reading the wavier is about. I actually feel sorry for the person at CIBC who has to deal with being supplied with picture that the Cure didn't have a release for. It's not the bank's fault. And with the chaos of the run, I think it's going to be hard for the organizers to keep track of the people who have actually signed up.

 

[zombiekilla]

Hello guys!

So that's where we are now on this: (I thought a few of you were interested in the outcome)

So since as MARKC put it there was a waiver on the application! However, my mother who ran with me and is on the picture did not sign any waiver becuase it was too late to register, so we just started running!

So now CIBC, who is the Run's major sponsor, is trying to solve the whole thing. Since my mother is a realtor, we've requested all foreclosures from the bank to go to her. So they are still deciding.

As for myself, I am hoping to get something out of it as well. Now we are in 3 national fashion magazines and apparencty a couple of newspapers too, and this is besides posters in every CIBC branch across Canada.

Here is the status update

I would just be stoked to be in an add and wouldnt care to be paid for it. Im not trying to judge but it seems like your trying to get blood from a turnip. Get over it, buy a mag, and keep it to show the grand kids.

 

[ksmattfish]

I'm a dirty, liberal, leftist, commie, pinko, so I'm all for sticking it to the corporations. But in this case I think the charity is who will get stuck.

 

[mysteryscribe]

up against the wall you lefty swine....lol

 

[nealjpage]

I'm a dirty, liberal, leftist, commie, pinko, so I'm all for sticking it to the corporations.

Then what are you doing in Kansas?

 

[ksmattfish]

Then what are you doing in Kansas?

Fighting the fight! Actually, I'm in Lawrence, KS, which is a liberal stronghold in the bible belt. We believe in evolution, women should be allowed to vote, freedom of speech, all people are created equal even if their skin is darker, etc... All those zany ideas.

 

[castrol]

How about a shot of the ad for us?

 

[Alex06]

It's a rather sad commentary on life all the way around.

Agreed. I hope you don't sue.

 

[Peanuts]

Honestly, due to the nature of your mother's job, I would simply let it pan out and give them the heads up that next time they will just have to be sure they have proper permission from the participants.

Due to the real estate boom in the area right now, perhaps having her face splashed around in magazine ads will actually bring her business. If people notice that she is the same person selling 'so and so's house down the street and see her on MLS, they might consider also working with a person who also extends a helping hand to the community.

 

[Steve Wynn]

Try a simple method, contact the hair product advertiser, advise them of the situation and encourage them to contact thier attorney. In the US the photo could be used for editorial usage but any recognizable person must have signed away their rights for any commercial purpose.

Steve

 

[mysteryscribe]

Personally I miss the days when the subject of an image had to prove that he/she were adversely effected by the use of the image. If the shot of a girl standing on a pier was taken by a photographer and it showed up in a tuna advertisment, so what she was on the pier anyway. She was in no way inconvenienced or damaged by the use of her image.

Now when it came to body swapping, or putting an image of a church lady in playboy, there was a definite need for action. But an after the fact lawsuit, to make a buck from a guy who actually did the work, was pretty much tossed.

Fortunately I don't work in a world where you have to carry a five page release form around to made sure you don't get sued. If someone recognizes their face in a retro shot I made, odds are they aren't going to want the cobbled together camera I shot it with, and that's all I own.

As for the lawyer thing, hire the best one you can find, Mortage your house if you have to, you need to have some skin in the game to be a player.

P's arch conservative: I like the man/woman who give jobs to people like me.

 

[DocFrankenstein]

Consider that the sponsers of this event (Run for Cure) probably contribute more to the cause than the run itself generates.

Is this how it actually works or how it should work in a lala land? :er:


The run for the cure may not be affected at all. The photog may have been hired to shoot there... or he may have been a freelancer.

It was his fault for not getting a release and then selling it to the bank.

 

[mysteryscribe]

I disagree,

He most likely was hired to shoot a few picks and deliver them and probably did just that. The major sponsor probably made them available to the large donars. My guess is the picture they are talking about is an action shot with several people in it. Just the kind of thing you see on posters saying. "Look what a good community service we did."

A tv station once hired me to shoot a piano presentation. The station had arrange to have it donated to an elementary school. The tv station wanted a shot of the teacher and the kids around the piano holding the cerificate from the music store. I made the shot, billed the tv station and they distributed it to the music store and a couple of other people. The shot wound up in the music store's newspaper adv.

I think that pretty much falls in the same category as this. Nobody wanted to sue anyone for having them or their kid's pic in the newspaper adv. I'm not sure exactly what grounds they would use to sue anyway. What are the damages here it was an event that they participated in freely. It was not a saleried gig they weren't paid for.

They were in the public not really having any expectation of privacy. I don't see the grounds.

But then I was no lawyer just a paid by the job photographer.