Pixiq

The specific requirements for model releases vary from state to state, so be to absolutely safe you should consult a lawyer on your particular state's statute. Note that some states have statutes containing very specific, unambiguous language that can be easily understood by anyone; New York is one example. Since most published works, magazines, and ads appear in the state of New York at one time or another, many clients require that your model release satisfy New York law. No matter where the image was taken, retouched, or printed, if the image is shown in NY, it needs to satisfy the crystal clear NY statutes. What matters is where it appears, not necessarily where the image was shot.

Generally speaking, you are required to obtain the written permission of a subject for his or her inclusion in any image used for advertising, promotional, or trade purposes—regardless of whether the photo is used by a for-profit or not-for-profit entity. In this respect, a photo employed in a Red Cross advertisement is no different than an ad to sell Dell computers. Images from wedding and portrait work should be released if you intend to use them on your website, in your blog, as a display in your studio, for self-promotion, or in a mailer.

Images used for editorial or certain fine art uses generally do not require a written model release. To claim editorial use, the image must be newsworthy in and of itself, and can't be primarily used for commercial purposes. Likewise, don't assume you can call your image a work of “fine art” and thus avoid the need to have a model release. In the event your subject objects to such use, a court may closely—and we mean closely—scrutinize your fine art credentials. You may need to demonstrate you’ve been shown regularly in art galleries and museums, if you’re work has been “collected,” and if the subject work has been produced in limited numbers. You can’t suddenly deem your own work “fine art” for the sole purpose of avoiding a lawsuit.

Your model release should also cover the entry of the image into a photo exhibit, competition, or contest. You’ll find most if not all legitimate competitions require you to provide a model release on demand. And realize that only the people included in the picture can sign a release for themselves, with some exceptions like guardians signing for their children. So for a wedding photograph, neither the bride nor the groom, nor anyone else, can sign a release on behalf of Uncle Charlie or Aunt Sally.

Case Studies

Family Feuds

Nobody fights like family. The ugliest, most hotly contested lawsuits concern divorces and wills. Ed has been professionally involved in the following scenario only about a dozen times. Same movie, same script; only the actors change.

A young hotshot male photographer shoots a young wannabe female model for “their portfolio." Relationship heats up; they move in together or even marry. His muse never signs any model release unless a paying client (few and far between in the early years) insists upon one. He cheats on her. She cheats on him. They fight, they break up, they reconcile, they divorce, and they split on less-than-amicable terms. One of those portfolio shots (sans release) turns up just when the model is looking for an excuse to break her ex’s legs! The model has since become a big star (which she of course, attributes to leaving him). She strides into Ed’s office saying she wants his head on a platter and, oh yeah, money would be good too.

LESSON: 50% of all marriages end in divorce. There are no reliable statistics on disgruntled former lovers, friends, stalkers, and so on. People and relationships change. Diamonds and model releases, however, are forever. A simple signed release would have saved the photographer tons of grief and, oh yeah, money too.

Simply put, in every circumstance you are never wrong and always better off having a signed model release in your pocket. Releases, like copyright registrations, are cheap, excellent, and essential forms of business insurance.

The rights of a person in his or her portrait, image, likeness, or even voice are commonly termed “rights of publicity” or “rights of privacy.” These rights are independent of any of the photographer’s intellectual property rights, such as copyright. Copyright is just a photographer’s right to his images and how those images are shown and controlled. Subjects in your photos also have different and sometimes conflicting rights. In short, the person in your photo—whether a professional model or not—has rights too. Those rights may parallel those of the photographer or conflict with them. You may want to license an image to a particular client for particular purposes, but if the model does not grant the same rights by his or her consent, you cannot license your image for that purpose. The result being that you can’t make a buck. You must strive to derive as many rights from the model/layperson as possible. Ideally both photographer and subject will find themselves on the same page, licensing identical rights to a paying client or customer.

Copyright does not give a photographer any rights to show an image without a model’s consent. Want to put up wedding photos or a recent senior shoot on your website or blog? Well, you have to have a release to be properly protected. Depending on what state you’re in, you may be sued and you may lose.

Find copies of model release forms you can customize and use in your daily business. While many differ slightly in form according to the type of shoot, use, or payment, they serve the key purpose of obtaining the model’s written consent to use his or her image for limited or unlimited purposes.

It’s easy to see why stock agents, ad agencies, models, and their agents and clients specifically require being provided with a copy of the model releases: they permit intended use and prevent lawsuits. Images without accompanying releases are generally worthless for most commercial usages, with the notable editorial/fine art exceptions. Concern about proper model releases applies to all sorts of photography and all sorts of clients.