Photo release from dog owners at public event?

[Leftyplayer]

I will be photographing at a dog event in a public setting. It goes without saying that one should get a photo release from people photographed. However, do I need a release from owners for portraits of their pets (where only the dog is photographed)?

 

[bentcountershaft]

Depends on what you are going to do with the image.

 

[Mully]

I would get a release and be covered.... you might want to use the image in the future and having the release will keep you free from liability.

 

[tirediron]

You would in fact require a property release, as, unfortunately, animals are considered property. The easiest thing to do will to be prepare a combined model and property release, and, if you don't use one section stroke it out. For the description, describe the dog by breed, appearance, gender, and "as belonging to..."/

 

[table1349]

Yeah, you wouldn't want to be sued in Doggy court and have to pay a huge fine in kibbles and bits.

 

[KmH]

Yep, dogs are property and have zero legal rights.

Unless a dog is a registered trade mark, somehow 'famous', or widely recognized as belonging to a specific well known person, you likely don't even need a property release.

If the dog owner is in the image, a model release for the person is in order.

A Digital Photographer's Guide to Model Releases: Making the Best Business Decisions with Your Photos of People, Places and Things

www.asmp.org

The additional consideration is a 'public event' where the dog owner cannot expect a 'reasonable degree of privacy'.

Ultimately, how an image is used is the deciding factor. Selling prints to the public is considered an editorial use, not a commercial use. At least as long as mass distribution is not involved.

 

[KmH]

More from Dan Heller - Dan Heller's Photography Business Blog: Busting Myths about Model Releases

While it's true that model release are necessary for certain situations, the actual laws about these issues are deep and complex. As rumors and hearsay perpetuate on the net, the over-simplification has resulted in virtually all the "advice" and conventional wisdom about model releases to be entirely wrong. And the reason why these myths perpetuate is because they cause no harm. No one ever got sued for having a model release. So, people follow the advice because they (and others) seem to be safe, perpetuating the myths.
- Dan Heller

 

[Leftyplayer]

Thanks folks. I'll plan to have a model/property release with me. I'll get it as much as I can to be covered, but good to know it's not the end of the world if I miss a few.

 

[table1349]

Thanks folks. I'll plan to have a model/property release with me. I'll get it as much as I can to be covered, but good to know it's not the end of the world if I miss a few.

Well in that case make sure you have enough so you can get one from everyone that might own a building, vehicle, umbrella or what ever form of property you happen to have in the shot.

 

[vintagesnaps]

I think it depends on usage - for publication in a newspaper (editorial use) there isn't usually a concern about needing a release although a publication may request or require one. Commercial or retail use is typically where you need to obtain permission or get a release signed.

Corbis as mentioned in the link was licensing photos for professional use as rights managed images with restrictions re: obtaining necessary releases and permissions. If you use the photo on a T shirt or on your website to sell as prints you might need to check into it further or get releases signed so you're covered.

(ASMP used to have what they called a pocket release for photographers to use to carry with them, and I think now have an app - although I don't know if it's available to the public or just to members.)

 

[skieur]

More from Dan Heller - Dan Heller's Photography Business Blog: Busting Myths about Model Releases

While it's true that model release are necessary for certain situations, the actual laws about these issues are deep and complex. As rumors and hearsay perpetuate on the net, the over-simplification has resulted in virtually all the "advice" and conventional wisdom about model releases to be entirely wrong. And the reason why these myths perpetuate is because they cause no harm. No one ever got sued for having a model release. So, people follow the advice because they (and others) seem to be safe, perpetuating the myths.
- Dan Heller

Mmm. So Dan is indicating that you do NOT need a property release for a dog, but rumors perpetuate that you do, and no one has got sued for having a model release.

On the other hand, another point of view is USE your rights or Lose Them. I follow that premise and have never been sued successfully.