Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-26-2011, 07:34 AM   #1
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 234
An unlimited and perpetual model release?

There are some people for whom I regularily shoot pictures and I was wondering whether it would be legal to make them sign a model release which states that there is no time limit for the photoshoot and that the release is valid for all photoshoots of this person that I do until the end of time. Would this be legal? What is the best way to do it?

01-26-2011, 07:58 AM   #2
Senior Member
Capslock118's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Haven, CT
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 173
hmmm...

interesting question - a perpetually binding agreement...

i'll have to ask my new wife if contracts like that are valid
01-26-2011, 08:20 AM   #3
Veteran Member
Jodokast96's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Erial, NJ USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,134
While I'm sure it can be done legally, the question really is if they'd go for it. You may be better served by signing a one, two, or even five year contract stating that you any shoots in that time period are covered in perpetuity. You both then have the option to renew or not at the end.
01-26-2011, 08:48 AM   #4
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 15,903
What country are you in. This sort of thing may be possible in one country but not another.
Your best bet is to get a release every time you shoot with a particular model and to remember what releases are for.
You don't necessarily need a model release depending on what you do with the images.

01-26-2011, 09:07 AM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: madrid
Photos: Albums
Posts: 833
Nope..that is not legal...you cannot resign to your rights perpetually..at least in europe (continental, not common wealth tipe of law..)...there is no way to make that type of contracts. If you state that the agrement is perpetual that clause is considered illegal and the contract is integrated..meaning that the principles of civil law will be applied and that the contract, and the issues that arise from it will be solved using the articles of the "codigo civil".
Don't really think that any western country will abide that type of contracts, usually it's a widely accepted principle that human inherent rights cannot be perpetually resigned. And you are dealing there with some self image and intimacy (not sure if that is the correct word in english, i mean like private life..) issues.
01-26-2011, 09:15 AM   #6
Veteran Member
Jodokast96's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Erial, NJ USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,134
Those types of contracts are legal in the US. Take a look at any rules for entering a photo contest and you'll see what I mean. However, I just looked, and it seems that the OP is in the UK, so what you say may apply.
01-26-2011, 09:25 AM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: madrid
Photos: Albums
Posts: 833
QuoteOriginally posted by Jodokast96 Quote
Take a look at any rules for entering a photo contest and you'll see what I mean
Think you are wrong there mate..what you give there are the rights for the photo..not your personal rights over your own image (that is what student is talking about)...it would be like entering a contest and being forced to give not only the rights of the submitted photo but the rights of all future photos i make..that is abusive and illegal in any western country (it certainly is in Europe..).
I'm pretty sure no U.S. judge and finally the supreme court would admit a contract where some personal rights would be given away for ever...it could be compared to voluntary, till the end of time, servitude (or AKA voluntary, legally refrained, slavery...).
There are international treaty that ban this kind of behaviour..we are not free to resingn for ever to our own freedom (you cannot sign a contract with an enterprise where you state you won't ever leave them..it would be illegal..).

01-26-2011, 09:26 AM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 534
This is an interesting question. I use a standard release form, and where is says to describe the shot (s), I put any and all. USA
01-26-2011, 09:34 AM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: madrid
Photos: Albums
Posts: 833
Yep that is a very general statement, but it only refers to one single photoshoot..that is why it can be legal..you can give away the rights you inherently own of your own image for an occasion, maybe a number of shoots, but you can not give them away forever and for every photoshoot...Your standart release form is only valid for one occasion, and if you took photos of the model at a different time without a new release you could be sued. You would be liable of responding for an infringement of image rights and could be forced to pay indemnization, not only for the profit you may have made but also for the moral damage you may have caused.(resuming it could be hell).
01-26-2011, 09:38 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: madrid
Photos: Albums
Posts: 833
QuoteOriginally posted by Jodokast96 Quote
the OP is in the UK
Oh and when i refer to europe i'm talking about continental europe. UK is much more like the States when we're discussing Law matters (two different ways of understanding and applying Law and jurisprudence..).
01-26-2011, 09:46 AM   #11
Veteran Member
Jodokast96's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Erial, NJ USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,134
But that's not what he's asking for either. He isn't asking for the right to their image and likeness, just the photos he takes. He's just asking that any photos he shoots, ever, he retains the right to use, forever. It's not a whole lot different than having the person in question sign a release for every single shoot he does with them, forever. Instead of many releases, it's one.

What you describe seems little different than what many record labels do by getting artists to sign over the rights to their music, and sometimes even their names, and so far that seems to have been upheld in the courts. Ever notice how there are some bands out there that contains not one single original member, yet they perform under that name? And how all the original members can get back together, but are unable to perform under their own bands name? Because the record labels own those rights, not the artists, because they signed them away. A hypothetical example, in that the record company does not hold these particular rights. You go to a KISS concert and it's Moe, Larry, Curly, and Shemp up there with the make up on performing. But if Paul, Gene, Ace, and Peter put on a concert, dressed up, and called themselves KISS, they'd be the ones getting sued, and rightfully so.
01-26-2011, 10:08 AM   #12
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 234
Original Poster
Hmm, I see. I am indeed in the UK. I am shooting pictures of a very old woman whom will probably be unable to sign anything very soon since she is in a poor state of health.

Can anyone tell me whether it is necessary to include address details of a person in a model release? Also can I call a Model Release a personal release? Someone I am shooting won't sign something called Model Release because it makes her feel vain or something... She told me to call it a Personal Release...

Last edited by Student; 01-26-2011 at 10:13 AM.
01-26-2011, 10:10 AM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: madrid
Photos: Albums
Posts: 833
QuoteOriginally posted by Student Quote
model release which states that there is no time limit for the photoshoot and that the release is valid for all photoshoots of this person that I do until the end of time.
Read again.
An eternal photoshoot is the same as saying any future photoshoot..just a phrasing..in legal terms an eternal photoshoot is comparable to an eternal continuing-performance contract..that clause would be considered illegal..that's why those type of contracts can be broken if you just tell the supplier with some time (usually the same time period that the one estipulated for the automatic renewal for the contract.) they are not eternal, just for business sake they don't do one each time they order a product.

And even if he is not asking for the right to their likeness or so, he is asking them to give him their rights of image when he takes a picture, anytime anywhere..you are not resigning to your right to self-image as a whole but you are resigning to it in certain conditions for ever (wich is still illegal..even if it's not done as a whole.).
QuoteOriginally posted by Jodokast96 Quote
Ever notice how there are some bands out there that contains not one single original member, yet they perform under that name?
Not the same...One thing is that a company owns a trademark and another very different is that it could own inherent personal rights...
In your Kiss example the company owns a name, a brand...in student's case he would be able to photograph those involved anytime, anywhere and own the photo rights...it's not the same.

You could try to redact something like a continuing-performance contract, where you state that it is a relation dilated in time and that ,unless otherwise especified, you have the right to photograph them..but an eternal clause would never stand. And it may be tricky to make a non abusive contract that will be considered legit.
In law the phrasing is very important and can lead to a contract being considered illegal or non-existant, or arranged by some clauses or principles we may not want.
01-26-2011, 04:14 PM   #14
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 234
Original Poster
So can it be called a Personal Release or not?
01-26-2011, 05:49 PM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: madrid
Photos: Albums
Posts: 833
Well..i don't think of any reason of why it couldn't be called that...but it is important that the content of the release is clear. That it is stated that you get the rights over the images produced, and that the model agrees with the uses (the ones intended or any kind of use you might want, depending of your relation with the models they will agree or not to any kind of use.)...if you are going to modify the photos or use them in any kind of different way it must be stated...you should also include the printing if you are going to print or send to a magazine..etc.
How you call it doesn't matter so much if the content is clear.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, model, photography, release, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Like your unlimited High-speed DSL? VF-19 General Talk 9 01-04-2011 05:43 PM
Nature Ducks Unlimited OrenMc Post Your Photos! 4 06-27-2010 05:46 PM
Misc A Perpetual Sequence kevinschoenmakers Post Your Photos! 6 04-21-2010 02:10 AM
to go far or stay within yards in macro unlimited Tripod Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 32 08-14-2008 02:33 AM
The Perpetual Unprocessed Photo Thread! cputeq Post Your Photos! 17 07-06-2008 04:58 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:16 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top