Photograph Rights

[Redwoodream]

I'm not sure if this is the right section, and likely this question has been asked before, but I wasn't sure how to search for it (linking to another post that answers my question would be great!).

I live in a small town, and I really want to make a photo collage/mosaic (I'm not sure what its called exactly) of pictures from around town, and of course I would like some locals in the shots. I have been the photographer for a local festival for several years so I already have a number of photos from that, plus over the next year I would like to take more at events and just around town.

My question is, if I am not going to be selling the photos (the intended use of the finished project is to put it in a local yearly art show, and maybe have it on display at a local store), then do I still need releases from everyone I photograph? And what about the photos that I have taken at events in the past? I was young and had no idea about getting releases to take pictures of people!

At one of the upcoming events there will be a lot of people and a number of them will be kids, all of whom will be running around and its nearly impossible to track down who is their parents and even then a good number of their parents are not english speaking. How do I handle that situation?

I was wondering if maybe I could put out a flyer/message that I will be taking these pictures but I had rather hoped to have the finished project be a bit of a surprise.

Any advice?

Thanks!

 

[2WheelPhoto]

did you peek around? there's a thread in play already about such topics

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photographic-discussions/305640-candid-photography-question.html

 

[Redwoodream]

Thanks! I was actually looking for information on what you can do with that photograph after you take it, which the poster did not mention, but the link in the thread looks like it might have what I need.

 

[tirediron]

Since you don't list your location in your profile, it's hard to say for sure, but in general, in North America, photographs taken of people in public areas are considered fair game for non-commercial use. That said, getting a release is always a good idea, even if you don't need it. Make up a generic release, and keep a few in your bag, 'just in case'.

 

[FitzTML]

First, consult an intellectual property rights lawyer.

Now for my free advice good for the United States only: Legally you can take any picture you want from any public space. "Art" can be anything, and doesn't necessarily need a release, but you could easily be sued, if you don't have one. There are other considerations, but that's all the free legal advice I can afford.

 

[skieur]

Thanks! I was actually looking for information on what you can do with that photograph after you take it, which the poster did not mention, but the link in the thread looks like it might have what I need.

You can do whatever you want with the photo is the US or Canada, but you cannot use it for advertising purposes.

skieur

 

[KmH]

There are 2 kinds of photograph usage (legal definitions, not 'street' definitions):
1. Commercial
2. Editorial

To use a person's likeness commercially, it's a very good idea to have a valid, properly executed model release on file from every recognizable person in a photo(s). The release is legal protection for the people in the photo(s), and for the publisher of the photo(s).
Note: Model release law varies by state and country.
Note: The photographer may be the publisher.
Consequently, what legally does and doesn't constitute publication also has to be considered.

For editiorial use a release is generally not needed. A photographer prints of photos with people in them, because that is usually an editorial use even though the photographer may have made some money. Even if the prints sell for $20,000 or $30,000 each - Nussenzweig v. DiCorcia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note that the newspaper photographers usually do not need to get model releases, because their photos are used editorially.

Posting photos on a personal website, or displaying the photos in a gallery or art show is usually considered editorial usage.

In summary, the laws regarding using photos that have people in them are not as cut and dried as some laws are, like traffic laws. Also more than a person's face can make them recognizable.
If you'd like to learn more regarding the complexities read - A Digital Photographer's Guide to Model Releases: Making the Best Business Decisions with Your Photos of People, Places and Things

 

[imagemaker46]

Why do people always suggest contacting lawyers for everything photo related? I've been involved with one lawyer (photo related) in my life, and I didn't hire the guy, I had to settle a dispute between other people and I was caught in the middle.

I take the pictures, if I have no intention of using them in connection with advertising, I use them, if they are being considered for advertising, I get a photo release, and in most cases will cut the subject in on the profits. I own the rights to what I shoot. I don't need a lawyer to tell me that.

 

[Redwoodream]

Thanks everyone! I think what I will do is make sure people are aware that I am photographing them and go based on the reactions I get. I will make sure to have a release on hand just in case. Its so hard to say sometime which way people will go.

By the way, I am in California, which I think might be more sue happy then other states, but I could be wrong.