Posted on 11/23/2007 2:46:44 PM PST by Bear_Slayer
A start
https://asmp.org/commerce/legal/releases/
Also - from:
http://www.photosource.com/psn_full.php?type=FPNews&id=145
“The rule of thumb is that editorial usage (book, magazine illustration) does not require a model release; but advertising, promotion, endorsement usage always requires a model release. It’s understandable why there is confusion, when so many editorial photo editors in the Photographer’s Market directory, say that they need a model
release.”
Almost every magazine as an Editorial Submission Guide. I have yet to see one that does not require that, at a minimum, you state you have a release on record with any submission.
My rule of thumb is -- IF an organization issues you press (sometimes called Media) credentials, you usually do not need a model release for images shot at the site of the ‘event’. These are news type events - disaster drills and the like sponsered by a civil authority.
If you do not have press credentials and/or the event is not a ‘public’ event - cover your six and get signed releases from everyone. And have a witness line (not your signature there either) and use it if possible.
My camera bag is big enough to carry a small clipboard loaded with blank releases.
If in doubt, check with your local DA or Attorney General for local rules/laws/customs.
The cash you save may be your own.
I don’t do teevee or video submissions, so you should check with your ‘market’ to see what rules they have.
I have no idea. I know as a rule that the link I posted above is the standard all over the country. It’s the rule I go by. There have been many times at crime scenes where we got the shots we needed from the street or sidewalk. Once a fed tried to be the bully and said we had no right to take photos but our guy stood his ground and nothing happened.
Besides, who gives a frack about New York City, anyhow? That place is run by a nanny state control freak. If NYC did this, I’m surprised that it hadn’t been challenged in court. I’ll never understand why the rest of the country feels they have to follow what they do...no matter what it is.
I presume he would have turned his cruiser's dash-cam off at this time, since by his own admission filming was illegal.
” I’ll never understand why the rest of the country feels they have to follow what they do...no matter what it is.”
That stopped about the time the Internet came on line. Both California and New York lost thier places as trend setting metropolises.
Driver’s ed films of the 1950s and 1960s were made staking out “nightwatch” for car accidents. NONE of the moaning DYING victims or their families ever gave consent.
Police used to ever get some “order” at the scenes by letting people FILE past the cars on foot.
He was being charged with a bullsh** crime.
I’ve seen articles by officers where they claim that the first word out of someone’s mouth when being questioned is Always a lie.
At least the bro didn’t taze you.
Actually, I think you are painting with very broad strokes when you say “cops today.” However, this particular cop seems to have overstepped his authority. The filmer had broken no laws, had not been detained or arrested, and was on public property. Therefore, she was OK.
While I appreciate your explanation, and links, it seems to me that I said essentially the same thing you said.
I am not any sort of professional at this. My blog is read by two to three people every day so no one’s going to bother going after me.
But I did say that it would be far more dangerous to go posting faces on the internet, for example, without a release or permission of some sort, rather than the actual taking of their pictures as the poster was positing.
I don’t know about public events, accidents and such as being permissable cause I don’t do that sort of thing. I’d be very careful about it and that’s what my post said, based on my limited experience.
Public figures are a whole nothing thing.
Beyond that, I’m just an amateur. An amateur a bit confused as to why you capitalize that I should LEARN the Rules! when I said to be careful about posting pics of people without their permission.
I’m not, or will I ever be, involved in anything likely to require model releases.
I do know that posting pics of people without their permission on your Blog is dumb. People have a right to their privacy and they can sue if you don’t respect that.
I’d always get some sort of permission although, heh, I’ve never encountered this.
What I DID encounter, if you want a story, is a commenter on my Blog who posted a very nasty news item about a soap opera star who owned a dance studio in New Jersey. I didn’t know anything about it but the commenter DID provide a link to his assertions and I personally checked the link and it was legit.
The soap opera star had been accused of photographing young girls in the changeing room of another dance studio before moving to NJ. The soap opera star was accused, according to the link provided by the commenter. The article did not give any details after the accusation.
So this soap opera star writes me an email and tells me he’s going to sue the bejeesus out of me for allowing this comment on my Blog as ...and this guy really said this...the newspaper links was not legit.
So I wrote him back and told him that the link provided by the commenter was indeed legit...why was he lying?
The soap opera star writes back and says....well, okay...maybe the article was legit but the charges were later dropped. Well damn....who’s doing the lying here, the soap opera star or the commenter?
I said I wasn’t taking down the comment because here was this guy lying to me and the comment was backed up by a legit link to the assertions he made in his comment. frankly I think this soap opera star was a pervert photographing young girls in the changeing room and this is why the commenter was so upset. I figure if the soap opera star was so damn innocent why did he lie to me? Maybe hoping I wouldn’t check? Hey, I’m a true crime guy....this spells G U I L T Y to me.
The problem was the commenter did make some other assertions that were not backed up by links to anything and at some point I had to decide which battles I wanted to fight. I took down the comment but I’m a bit bitter about it. I really believe this soap opera star is a pervert and was browbeating anybody trying to get the truth out.
Well hey, my little Blog tale isn’t about photographs but I would argue that common sense might go a long way.
If one is in the business, then perhaps more research is justified.
In summary, I’d be darn careful of putting private individuals’ pictures in a public setting because unless they’re a public figure....you could get sued.
It my story and I’m sticking to it.
Avi Adelman is bit of neigborhood gadfly in the Dallas area. He films a lot of police action and other things in his neighborhood. Recently in Dallas a TABC office tried to block his filming of an arrest by shining a flashlight at the camera. Defense was the person arrested did not want to be filmed. He filed a complaint, no word on the result.
http://www.barkingdogs.org/news/node/419
This cannot be true. There are many places where photography is prohibited. (E.g. many bridges and roadways.)
ML/NJ
Cool, thought I detected a bit of _ I’m going to start doing this more often_ Off base for me it seems.
Common sense is good, but is little help if someone decides to sue...
I do what I do for cold hard csh in the print media.
Just trying to help you with some links etc, didn’t mean to harsh on ya.
Have fun
Those restrictions are mostly in the mind of those claiming them and do not in fact exist.
ML/NJ
We should all be very afraid and wire up.
If Barney Fife gets stupid, you stop, you get his badge number, you call his boss (who may be stupid enought to back him), you also publish his stupidity via You Tube, he gets in trouble, and then they leave you alone. There is NO ENFORCEABLE LAW than can ban taking pictures or videos of venues and vistas from public property.
The funniest one I have heard asserted is copyright of the facade, which is of course totally specious.
Kowtowing to idiots because they have a badge, be they sworn LEOs, LPOs or rent-a-cops only reinforces their bad behavior that they can make it up as they go along.
If you are on your own property, or you are on public property you may take any pictures you want.
While you are at it why not play his game better than he does ? Go take his trash off of the public sidewalk and let him see you . All that macho crap is over rated . Think when you fight and consider it a public service .
What you do with the images you capture is something else. The only purpose you can put these images to is in an editorial context. That is, as part of news coverage. You can’t display them in a manner that is intended to embarrass or harass the victim(s). You also can’t use it for commercial purposes, like to advertise the services of an attorney or doctor or towing service.
I would consider you fortunate that you weren’t handcuffed, strip searched and incarcerated in a cell full of drunks and reprobates. As a rule if the police officer is willing to confront you he or she is also willing to arrest you. The odds are in their favor. Most people will be content to get away with having the charges dropped and won’t pursue the matter.
My wife’s cousin in Phexix City, AL, went out before daylight one morning to get his paper and noticed his neighbor lady standing beside a tree next to the property. It was dark and she was on the opposite side of the tree so he couldn’t tell just what was going on. A short time later, as the sun was rising, he noticed a commotion in the yard where he had seen the lady. He went back out and discovered that she rather than standing by the tree she had hung herself as some point during the night. The cousin is a retired Army photographer and strings for the Phenix City and Columbus, GA., papers. He got his camera and set about taking pictures of the body hanging there in full public view. He was quickly challenged by the coroner who demanded the film from his camera. He refused and was promptly arrested and thrown in jail. After bailing out he tried for three days to find an attorney who would help him fight the charge, but no one wanted to take on the local political machine represented by the sheriff’s office, the local prosecutor, and the coroner. In the end he was able to get the charges dropped.
This is one of those situations where you might be entirely in the right but there’s not much you can do to force the issue. If you resist you will likely be handled very roughly by the cops. Then you are charged with a separate crime, even though you were not guilty of a crime to start with. Think of it as a positive Scooter Libby sign.
Let me hasten to remind that I am not an attorney and your mileage may certainly vary!
I was raised in a small town in Central Florida. When there was a serious accident in the area the citizens would flock to the scene. The ambulance had to come from 30 miles away and if it went through town people would close their shops, hop in their cars and follow it to the scene. The damaged car would be towed to one of the two dealerships in town and it would draw crowds for several days, especially if there were blood or tissue to be seen.
Sounds pretty cruel now, but that was the way of life in those days.
My dad was a deputy sheriff and made no attempt to keep people from walking up and looking at a body in a car. He felt they, especially the kids, needed to see, and smell, the results of an accident.
My headbutts with the law have generally gone south...way south
as a rule I don’t much cotton to Johnny Law....
when I was a boy and they wore straw slouch hats , khakis, and carried a hogleg they were more to my liking
since their favorite color went black and they all had to have an AR-15 in the trunk, they aren’t my cup of tea much
plus I hate confiscation laws
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.