And lo, Al Dykes <> emerged from the ether
and spake thus:
>
> I've got a few nice shots of strangers taken at street festivals and
> similar public events. In most cases, the people knew that their
> picture was taken by me, a stranger and they didn't indicate any
> objection. In general, we never talked. None of these pictures show
> the subject in any way embarrassing. I'm not selling these pictures.
>
> What are the issues with putting these pics on my public website?
There is absolutely no problem. First, they are in a public place, a
festival in the street, where legally there is no "expectation of
privacy."
That said, I have had this conversation with Dan Heller and he has
always made it completely clear that he doesn't even see a reason for
model releases (with a couple of exceptions). Here we go:
1. If you sell use rights to someone off your website and they get
sued for defamation or whatever, that's their problem, not yours;
you hold no responsibility as the seller of the rights. Surprised?
2. If the work is used in an "editorial" context, which is to say
anything published in a newspaper, magazine, etc., you don't have
to ask permission. That's how the Paparazzi can do what they do.
It's legal.
The only reason you'd have to have an actual written release is if you
are photographing the subject in private (in the studio, etc.) and you
sell the work as an art product directly to a consumer (not the rights
to publish, stock use, etc.)
I'm talking about America here, YMMV around the world, etc. Check your
own local statutes to be sure, but for the most part photographing
people in public, even without their knowledge, isn't a violation of
their privacy.
--
Aaron
http://www.fisheyegallery.com
http://www.singleservingphoto.com
Similar Threads
