Originally posted by Student 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.).
Originally posted by Jodokast96 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.