Lady asked me to remove her photo from my site?

[Light Guru]

right to use and publish photographs of the Assignment, its guests, attendees, and officials

My contract is with the theatre, not the actors individually

So she didn't sign it? You cannot hold a guest or attendees who did not sign your contract to the contract!

Thats just like her trying to tell you you have to abide by her theatre association rules.

I resend my previous comment. Remove the photo from your website.

 

[The_Traveler]

The theater should have an written agreement with the actors regarding use of their likeness for publicxity ourposes.
If not, in the future, the OP needs to establish a formal relationship with the subject just to protect himself.

 

[weepete]

"If you set out to be liked, you would be prepared to compromise on anything at any time, and you would achieve nothing." - Margaret Thatcher

Not the best person to quote. And if she wasn't that concered about being liked she wouldn't have got a voice coach to help her being vocally more appealing.

 

[weepete]

Ouch! A perfectly resonable reply from you granted their wishes and was met by an arsey veiled threat.

Question: was the shot taken at a show where the public had access or at an event on the theature's premisis where other people were present?

Seems like they are trying to imply that by any use of their image it's advertising if it was in the UK and they are in a premisis that they are aware the public has access to you have every right to take and keep copyright. I would seriously fight this now.

 

[table1349]

"If you set out to be liked, you would be prepared to compromise on anything at any time, and you would achieve nothing." - Margaret Thatcher

Not the best person to quote. And if she wasn't that concered about being liked she wouldn't have got a voice coach to help her being vocally more appealing.

I think the BBC summed it up quite nicely.


“Thatcher was Britain’s most important politician of the postwar era, her only rival for that title being Clement Attlee, creator of the welfare state. Her critics forget or ignore just how parlous was the state of Britain in 1979, and offer no credible policy alternatives about how the country could have been saved from union tyranny, hugely inefficient and loss-making state-owned industries, the stagnation of enterprise.

Her contribution to making Britain once more a viable proposition is almost impossible to overstate, but nor will history ignore the brutality and insensitivity with which she imposed some of her policies, especially in Wales and Scotland."
What is the nature of Margaret Thatcher's legacy?

Was she perfect? No. Was she influential? Yes. Did she leave her mark on Britain and the world. Undoubtedly.

 

[weepete]

I think the BBC summed it up quite nicely.

“Thatcher was Britain’s most important politician of the postwar era, her only rival for that title being Clement Attlee, creator of the welfare state. Her critics forget or ignore just how parlous was the state of Britain in 1979, and offer no credible policy alternatives about how the country could have been saved from union tyranny, hugely inefficient and loss-making state-owned industries, the stagnation of enterprise.

Her contribution to making Britain once more a viable proposition is almost impossible to overstate, but nor will history ignore the brutality and insensitivity with which she imposed some of her policies, especially in Wales and Scotland."
What is the nature of Margaret Thatcher's legacy?

Was she perfect? No. Was she influential? Yes. Did she leave her mark on Britain and the world. Undoubtedly.

Aye and we are not allowed to do politics here bud. And aye, she did leave a stain on British politics forever. You must be too young to remenber.

 

[DGMPhotography]

The actors have an understanding with the theatre that any and all photos can be used for promotion.

I think the issue is between what the theatre has communicated to its actors, and I'm kind of stuck in the crossfire. Even so, I still retain the rights to my photos.

But like I said, we will make sure to reinforce that with future actors so there's no confusion.

Oh, and look at this lovely "apology" she sent me the next day.

-
-

Hi Daryll,

Please accept my apology. Since I wrote you last night, I learned that NAME did pay you for the opportunity to use the headshot you took of him. Unless he signed a release beforehand, requesting his permission to use his headshot in your ad would have been prudent, as he was surprised to see it show up there, yet it does open my eyes to the big picture.

Having recognized NAME's photograph in your ad was the impetus for my checking out your website and - accidentally - discovering there my own headshot and some others in my PRODUCTION cast, and that's where the raising of my hackles began.

I stand by the other sentiments I expressed last night. I appreciate your positive and sincere attitude and, again, wish you well in your photography.

 

[Braineack]

Apparently the actors DONT have an understanding with the theatre that any and all photos can be used for your own personal promotion (not the promotion of the theatre).

and it surely violates their union contract with the theatre.

 

[pixmedic]

I don't blame you for taking the photos down.
sometimes its just not worth a fight. (sometimes it is though)

The actors have an understanding with the theatre that any and all photos can be used for promotion.

I think the issue is between what the theatre has communicated to its actors, and I'm kind of stuck in the crossfire. Even so, I still retain the rights to my photos.

But like I said, we will make sure to reinforce that with future actors so there's no confusion.

Oh, and look at this lovely "apology" she sent me the next day.

-
-

Hi Daryll,

Please accept my apology. Since I wrote you last night, I learned that NAME did pay you for the opportunity to use the headshot you took of him. Unless he signed a release beforehand, requesting his permission to use his headshot in your ad would have been prudent, as he was surprised to see it show up there, yet it does open my eyes to the big picture.

Having recognized NAME's photograph in your ad was the impetus for my checking out your website and - accidentally - discovering there my own headshot and some others in my PRODUCTION cast, and that's where the raising of my hackles began.

I stand by the other sentiments I expressed last night. I appreciate your positive and sincere attitude and, again, wish you well in your photography.

she (they) obviously dont understand the photography business or how copyright applies to it.
I guarantee they protect their own copyright privileges vigorously.
I dont know what "sentiments" she expressed last night, but it sounds like she played the entitlement card.
i hope whatever future business is gleaned from your relationship with her makes up for her disingenuous apology and snobbish demands.

i know, i know...you wanted to play nice with the big shots...I can understand that. not even saying it was the wrong move.
I just hope setting the precedent of immediately backing down when challenged, even when right, doesnt bite you in the arse with these people later.

 

[table1349]

I think the BBC summed it up quite nicely.

“Thatcher was Britain’s most important politician of the postwar era, her only rival for that title being Clement Attlee, creator of the welfare state. Her critics forget or ignore just how parlous was the state of Britain in 1979, and offer no credible policy alternatives about how the country could have been saved from union tyranny, hugely inefficient and loss-making state-owned industries, the stagnation of enterprise.

Her contribution to making Britain once more a viable proposition is almost impossible to overstate, but nor will history ignore the brutality and insensitivity with which she imposed some of her policies, especially in Wales and Scotland."
What is the nature of Margaret Thatcher's legacy?

Was she perfect? No. Was she influential? Yes. Did she leave her mark on Britain and the world. Undoubtedly.

Aye and we are not allowed to do politics here bud. And aye, she did leave a stain on British politics forever. You must be too young to remenber.

It is hard to be political when you are dead. A part of history yes, but political, well even if you get elected you cannot serve.

As for being too young, not hardly there youngun. What I do remember however was that when she was elected Britain was a country that was in a permanent state of decline, coal mining strikes, the three-day week, rolling blackouts, rubbish piling up in the streets and even the dead being left unburied.

I watched nightly after coming home from work the swift victory in the Falklands. I was intrigued with the right to buy that allowed some of the poorest, hard working people to improve their lot in life.

I remember a British society that was threatened by a challenge to law and order itself that was transformed into a confident and well-ordered society Britain enjoys today.

There were many changes under Thatchers watch that changed the history of Britain and in turn the world. Some for the good, and as I said some for the bad. However, it in undeniable that she left her mark on Britain and the world, otherwise you would not have such a feelings of dislike for her. If she had not, no one would remember her name.

 

[Overread]

If you want to talk politics please use the subscribers discussion section - otherwise please refrain from continuing the political discussion.

 

[DGMPhotography]

and it surely violates their union contract with the theatre.

I already said that the theatre is a non-union theatre, and I believe the actress in question isn't actually even part of the union. She was just citing their mandates.

In any event, I'm over it.

 

[Braineack]

and it surely violates their union contract with the theatre.

I already said that the theatre is a non-union theatre, and I believe the actress in question isn't actually even part of the union. She was just citing their mandates.

In any event, I'm over it.

fair nuff. being hired by the theatre itself just throws a wrench into it, especially if there is some sort of rider/agreement with the actors and theatre directly.

 

[KmH]

Hi Daryll,

Thank you for understanding.

The phrase "In conjunction with a commercial product" includes the "product" in a photographer's business.

Nope.
Whoever wrote that clearly does not know WTF they are talking about.

The photographer can sell prints to the general public all day long, because that is an editorial use, not a commercial use.
Any entity using the image for advertising or the promotion of a product is well advised to have a valid model release on file.

Photographers do not need a release to use images they have made for self-promotion nor self-advertising, unless the images were made under controlled conditions or in private.

Regardless, the model release you show you have in your contract has you covered 6 ways from Sunday.
However from a legal perspective, IMO, your model release clause has no need to mention your right to copyright images you make.
That's neither up to you nor the client, unless the shoot was a 'work for hire' situation.
https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf

 

[vintagesnaps]

A photographer retains copyright of images but this seems to be about usage - licensing usage with the theater if that's the client.

Next time maybe it would better if an actor has questions/concerns about usage of their images to be able to refer them back to the theater. I'd think the theater would have releases on file to use actors' images for publicity purposes in specific terms (such as for a specific production or season or the run of the play).

I would think any contract or release that the theater has with the actors might allow for any photographer they hire for publicity purposes being able to use the images to promote his/her photography business. But since it may not, I'd think it might be a good idea to make sure the theater has a copy of any contract/release up front that you will be using or will be asking the actors to sign. That way the actors would be aware that the photographer may use the images to promote his/her photography business. (And if an actor didn't read the contract or doesn't remember the specific terms, a reminder or copy of the contract could be provided to the actor as needed.) If it's covered in a contract, that could help prevent any surprises by actors seeing their photos turn up somewhere that hadn't been expected.

I don't think the model release necessarily covers the situation and the way it's worded to me sounds like it allows use of the images for stock photography and advertising in a way that could potentially allow a photographer to slap the photos on mugs and T shirts or stock sites or other commercial use. (Not that you would, but if the actors don't know a photographer, I can see why they'd have a problem agreeing to that model release - it seems too wide open.) Seems like it needs to be more specific to using photos from this production for marketing and promoting the photography business.

Here are a couple of examples including suggestions like writing releases and contracts in understandable language rather than legal sounding jargon. I have a book w/CD (an older version) that I found thru ASMP with sample forms (author is Tad Crawford). ASMP also has a 'paperwork share' section with a couple of sample contracts, etc. for actual jobs by photographers.

How to write a license | American Society of Media Photographers
The Big Picture: Collecting & Presenting Production Photos