Model Release Issues

[Kenneth May]

Just curious....When a picture is taken at a race, grid, paddock, etc. and there are fans, drivers, flag girls, etc in the shot, are you not by law, required to receive their permission (model release) to use the picture in a press release or news article about the race?

I had this question asked me about my sports photography business, that I need to obtain a release to use any photos taken at a tournament that I am working (and the only authorized photographer by the league) that are used on my sports website or future brochures. The answer for that is YES, so I would assume model releases would be necessary for all others....

Comments?
KM

[Justin Haugen]

Don't raceways have a condition that any persons on the premises could be subject to video/photo coverage which could be used for their promotional needs?

If I'm at a Nascar event and I photograph a car with spectators clearly in the background, that would mean I'd need a release form everyone in the shot.

I'm just trying to refine the thought process here, I'm certain you'll get the answer you're looking for from someone who knows here shortly.


Your purposes are editorial (press release, news article), you don't need a release for editorial/journalistic coverage.

[Dennis Murray]

Generally the backside of most tickets to sporting events, including races says that the user grants the property license to use their likeness in advertising, etc. for the venue or event. Other participants are under general release usually with the series.

As for your local photo business, if the tournament wants to use their likeness to promote the event in the future, they need a photo release. The best way to go about this is putting it in the registration packet and and having every participant complete one (hopefully the event isn't already in the past).

As for your website, I'm assuming that the photos are for sale, but they are for sale for personal use (sale back to the participant and their families) and not just for general public consumption (although there isn't much way to police that). In that case, I would provide provision for either an opt-out or password protection of the galleries if requested by the organizers.

[John Thawley]

I'm not a lawyer.... and I rarely stay at a Holiday Inn Express. That out of the way, I think the operative word here is "endoresment." You can not use someones likeness that implies they are ENDORSING you or a product.

Spectators that attend an event are out in PUBLIC... they are only entitled to a reasonable right to privacy. That's why the papparazzi is so out of control with celebrities. Until they move into the realm of stalking or exceed a person's privacy, they're protected. Invading privacy would be shooting through a residence window... following them to the bathroom etc. In a restaurant, walking down the street, at the beach.... they're in public. Nothing private about that.

Now... Madonna in concert? That's intellectual property. Tiger on the links, commerical and intellectual property beyond editorial and personal use.

I think you're bigger concern with school athletics is parents who don't want their kids face posted to the internet. I know I'm pretty careful about my kid. Too many creeps out there.

JT

[Jim Sykes]

People are getting a little sidetracked here, the original question was:

Just curious....When a picture is taken at a race, grid, paddock, etc. and there are fans, drivers, flag girls, etc in the shot, are you not by law, required to receive their permission (model release) to use the picture in a press release or news article about the race?

The key part is the last line. "to use the picture in a press release or news article about the race"

In this case, no matter what NO release is necessary. That is an editorial use and therefore there are no releases required for news and editorial use.

Only in a commercial respect would it start to come into play, such as selling prints for profit or using a photo in an advertisement.

So the answer to the specific question, is no, you dont need a release in that example.

[Kenneth May]

JT:
Excellent points about the kids and a very real concern....I struggle with that issue and have seen where to see galleries, a password is needed...and do that...but on the front page of a website, or to illustrate capabilities, want to show examples.....I guess the "easist" way to is to have release forms signed by parents and perhaps 'give away' a picture matted and backed for the release?

Back to the auto racing issue...thanks Jimmy for your response....I know I am asking a question about two areas (sports and auto racing), and since this is an auto forum, I should limit my questions to that arena....

KM

[Jacob Leveton]

yup... from my experiences, by you having consent (through a media pass) to photograph the event, and their implied consent to be photographed by attending the event (again, there is some 'reasonable consent' here that might not apply in extreme circumstances, IE upskirt / etc...), and the fact you are using this for editorial, you should be free and clear.

[Kenneth May]

Jacob:
Good post and interesting comment....about the 'up the skirt'...I wonder if any photographer has ever been sued or had an image taken down on a site, because a flag girl or bikini contest contestant didnt like the shot and didnt sign a waiver.....Mmmmmmmm

[Jim Sykes]

I heard someone with bad shave bumps didnt like a photo that was taken once, but she couldnt do anything about it. :D

[John Thawley]

I heard someone with bad shave bumps didnt like a photo that was taken once, but she couldnt do anything about it. :D

Those were probably just from nerves... the guy taking the pic creeped her out. LOL

[Kenneth May]

LOL...
And whoever would post such filth is slime as well! :D

Ahem...back on topic now...oh wait...we are on the topic....nevermind...