my face got published in an ad, what to do

mysteryscribe · Sep 8, 2006

thanks for the clerification, but the first set of legal research kept saying commercial use. The gentleman who sued in new york went at them on those very grounds, commerical use. Since it was always intended to be a money making event, it would seem on the surface he would have the most reason to get a release.

My point was it isnt a slam dunk just because you see your face in a newspaper advertisement. You are still going to have to show some purpose for filing your suit. They may settle for the neusense value or they may not, if they dont my guess is the up front money is on you. I dont think many lawyers are going to want to sue a charity over so trivial a matter. At least not on a contingency.

He sued on religious grounds and he still lost.

And as far as the gallery thing goes, if its for sale, to me it would seem to be the same thing. The photographer is selling it to the public not some corporation. Now the gallery might not have the same liable as a corporation would have. Hell I dont know Im a photographer not a lawyer.

My rule of thumb is:first: I never made enough money for anyone to sue me. Second: I don't own anything anybody would want, third: if you complain while I'm shooting it, I wont use it. No single image, esp if I'm not being paid to produce it, is worth this amount of hassle anyway.

In my case no matter how hard I tried to defend on the grounds of art, someone would just show my 'body of work' and I would get twenty years in the slammer.

mysteryscribe · Sep 8, 2006

I saw a national news show tonight with a retired judge discussing this issue. It was in reference to the movie about the assasination of bush. According to this retired judge. Bush nor anyone else can stop his image for being used in a commercial venture but may well be entitled to a percentage of the profits. This is so murky I doubt anyone in the whole world could predict the outcome of any given case.

It might just be one of those is it worth it type things. Which might be why it is done in the first place. Counting on it being to much trouble for john q to bother.

I think one thing for sure if all the hype keeps going people are going to start refusing to sign releases unless they are paid. It had gotten to be that kind of world.

JohnMF · Sep 13, 2006

47 posts into this thread and i can't beleive you've all missed the most important question!...

Who does your hair Calgary_Life???

mysteryscribe · Sep 13, 2006

see what happens when you ask a bunch of photographers anything... we wander all around and miss the really important stuff.

Renair · Sep 13, 2006

Just a quick one, even if a waiver was signed, what did it specify. Usually you can sign one for single publication use only, but if its for an advertising campaign and a magazine. I would ask if they wont give you money, to air brush you out of the picture, you could claim as a result your being harassed or something......

Steve Wynn · Sep 13, 2006

The famous and politicians are "news" and as long as the photo is not used to advertise a commercial product, they're fair game. But that doesn't mean you can lift a news photo off of the wire services, etc. Reprint them and sell them.

You can find out more about model releases, copyrights etc on www.ourppa.com and a lot of other sites.

Steve

Calgary_life · Sep 16, 2006

Well well well...
Some people are angry, some drifted off too far into philosophy of it... sorry to those who got angry... i didn't mean to offend anyone.

And just so everyone is clear - I am not after the money as such! I am fortunate enough to provide sufficiently for myself. And my grandmother is a cancer survivor! So I am not some hartless individual who is after sueing everyone for everything.

The point is - some letter asking us if this was ok would have been all i needed, some respect. For those who say, buy the mag and frame it for grandkids...I did buy - all 4! And I used to model in Europe before and i actually have my pic on the cover of the mag from 8 years ago, and that one is a very beautiful professional modeling pic, so...

To answer about the hair products - I have a hairdresser, but i don't use Revlon, and also my point was that - i do have some companies on my 'list' that i would NEVER buy products from or use their service, because of horrible experiences with them, and if this company was one of them - i would be so mad.

Just so those of you who are worried for THE RUN to loose money - I am not going to court. It is too much time and energy - I rather concentrate more on my business then waste time there. I also agree that world has turned into some very strange place - well my philosophy is 'for the century that I am meant to live on this planet in this body, don't try to change what's wrong around you - pick the best and use it!' AND as I am aware most professional service providers have Business Insurance anyhow! at least here in Canada. so - it is not the money from the donations!
I am a mortgage broker and this case would be like I for example get any of your guys picture and start advertising - "hey he or she is my client see how happy they are, do business with me", yet you have't even met me or used my service, maybe I am the worst for all you know - well this is what revlon did. I am not their client, , they weren't sponsors of this event last year! why are they put out a national ad saying I am?! In case of Britney Spears and Bush and whoever got mentioned here....well I am yet too see any AD for Ms. Spears ADVERTISING anything, while they haven't asked her permission. All the pic we see are of her life, street/even shots not promoting any product!

So - we'll see where it goes...

Bye for now - and enjoy life, don't be so searious!!!
N :heart: