At 12:15 3/13/02, Dave Shupe asked:
Why did he not need a model release?
Editorial/Photojournalistic use does *not* require a model release. It's a
reporting of news and is covered by 1st Amendment. Although there are
"shades of gray" and "finer points" about usage, only "commercial" use
requires a model release and the individual(s) must be recognizable. A
classic example of commercial use is advertising. Even though the
photograph might have been a "street candid" or made from a truly "publicly
owned" location, a model release is required from anyone recognizable in it.
That doesn't absolve the photographer (maybe more correctly, the publisher)
of liability for libel if an individual is portrayed in a misleading, or a
deliberately embarrassing or deragatory manner though. 1st Amendment
doesn't protect everything.
-- John
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|