Photos at a Public Event...

[Epiphany]

Not sure what the legalities are when photographing at a public event. I helped organize our local Easter Egg Hunt this year. We of course want photos to help promote the event for next year. I mostly took photos of the group at large. Mostly peoples backs or far enough that faces weren't in great detail. The up close photos I did take of people were of the volunteers helping for the day and our local Police and FD personnel or my own kids.

With that being said, I am just starting out with my photography business and do have an LLC. Am I best off watermarking my images or not? I did copyright them. I am protected by my LLC, in that they could go after my business only. Worried about sue happy people and my rights as a photographer. I know, I know.....don't ask legal advice online. Looking for some insight. I could be over thinking this completely! Thanks!!

 

[Designer]

In the U.S. photographs made in public, where people would have no expectation of privacy, are free and fair. While you are allowed to take the photos and even publish them, I would caution you to treat any recognizable subject with respect, just as you would expect someone else to do with a photograph of you.

This has been tested many times in the courts, primarily by people who object to their photograph being published in a newspaper, for instance. The publishers of newspapers usually win, unless they are foolish enough to slander someone.

If you use the photographs to promote your business or to sell, then you need to obtain a model release from any recognizable subject. A parent or guardian may sign for a minor, but you should make sure that it really is a parent or legal guardian who is signing.

 

[ac12]

There is a legal concept called "piercing the corporate veil."
So don't think that you can hide behind a LLC for everything.
You could be named personally in a suit.
Talk to your attorney about specifics, as this could/likely varies by jurisdiction and the specifics of the suit.

This then leads to the question of, how much insurance coverage do you have, and what will it cover/protect you from?

 

[KmH]

Five Things You Can Do to Protect Your Online Images |

Am I best off watermarking my images or not? I did copyright them.

Did you register your copyrights?

In the US your images are copyrighted the instant they are recorded in a tangible medium, like a memory card.
Nothing else need be done.
However, if you want to maximize the legal recourse copyright provides you have to register your copyrights with the US Copyright Office.

If you do not register your copyright(s) you can only pursue actual damages in US Federal court.
Actual damages have to be proved.
It's hard to justify pursuing a copyright action at a court and attorney cost of 10's of thousands of $$$$$ if your actual damages amount to well less than what an actual damages award could be.

If you do register your copyright(s) you can seek statutory OR actual damages in federal court.
Statutory damages are codified in copyright law from $200 up to a maximum award of $150,000 per infringed image, and do not have to be proven.
Being able to prove an infringement was "willful", like when the infringer deletes your watermark, is what gains access to the higher end of the statutory awards scale. Statutory awards also include your court and attorney costs, while seeking actual damages may not include being awarded attorney and court costs.

 

[Epiphany]

Do many of your averag

Five Things You Can Do to Protect Your Online Images |

Am I best off watermarking my images or not? I did copyright them.

Did you register your copyrights?

In the US your images are copyrighted the instant they are recorded in a tangible medium, like a memory card.
Nothing else need be done.
However, if you want to maximize the legal recourse copyright provides you have to register your copyrights with the US Copyright Office.

If you do not register your copyright(s) you can only pursue actual damages in US Federal court.
Actual damages have to be proved.
It's hard to justify pursuing a copyright action at a court and attorney cost of 10's of thousands of $$$$$ if your actual damages amount to well less than what an actual damages award could be.

If you do register your copyright(s) you can seek statutory OR actual damages in federal court.
Statutory damages are codified in copyright law from $200 up to a maximum award of $150,000 per infringed image, and do not have to be proven.
Being able to prove an infringement was "willful", like when the infringer deletes your watermark, is what gains access to the higher end of the statutory awards scale. Statutory awards also include your court and attorney costs, while seeking actual damages may not include being awarded attorney and court costs.

Do most professional wedding photographers/family portrait photographers etc. actually register their copyrights??

 

[KmH]

I can't speak for most, but smart intellectual property (copyright) owners do.

Copyright is valid for the life of the photographer, plus 70 years. Photographers pass their copyrights on to heirs.

Sometimes an average John/Jane Doe suddenly becomes a celebrity, locally, regionally, nationally or worldwide.

Here's just 1 story;
A photographer in little rural Kentwood, Louisiana (pop. 2000) makes high school senior photos for one of the local boys - Jason Allen Alexander.
A few years later the boy marries a girl he grew up around. His and her families socialized as they were growing up. They got married in Las Vegas, NV.
The marriage is annulled some 55 hours later.
The girl happened to be a globally very popular singer - Britney Spears.
Suddenly lots and lots of national publications were clamoring for images of Jason.
The photographer made some serious bank licensing Alexander's high school photos while the story was still hot.

 

[Gary A.]

To properly address protection and liability, what you do with the photos is equally as important as where the photos are captured. While the taking of images in a public place is considered fair game, they can only be used/published for “Editorial” purposes. Using the likeness of non-consenting people for ‘Commercial” purposes will open you up for law suits of which you will, most likely, not hold a winning hand. Inspire of what some mothers will shout at you, children have no greater right to privacy than an adult.

The event you described above, if it was on public property, most likely falls into the Editorial category allowing you to publish said images on your website or submitted them to newspapers. But those photos cannot be used for advertising or promotion without consent of the identifiable people.

There is not an easy black & white answer as there are many different facets and nuances to this question. There are many online sites which are quite good at addressing your question. There is also a provision regarding “public” called an “expectation of privacy”. In that case, say a person is on a public street and has a wardrobe malfunction. That person ducks into a public alley in order to remove themselves from a public place ... you cannot photograph them fixing the malfunction under the expectation of privacy clause. Conversely, a public person, like an elected official or a movie star, has less privacy right than a less known person.

 

[KmH]

Note that editorial use includes selling prints as "artistic expression".
Nussenzweig v. DiCorcia - Wikipedia