If you already have an account with us, please use the login panel below to access your account.


Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35
  1. #1
    DPP Member Rosscapili's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Model Releases...very important!



    Check out your images posted here folks. If you don't have the model releases signed by your models better remove your photos now to avoid trouble. We might have great images to show but there are legal matters we might have ovelooked. Payong kapati lang.

  2. #2
    DPP Fan nino_carandang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    -
    Posts
    4,540
    Post Thanks / Like
    Ross,

    Do you have more or less a model release template to share with the forum members?

    N
    There's no light to guide on my way home. There's no time to shine my rusty halo.

  3. #3
    Moderator Louie Aguinaldo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pasig City, Philippines
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosscapili
    Check out your images posted here folks. If you don't have the model releases signed by your models better remove your photos now to avoid trouble. We might have great images to show but there are legal matters we might have ovelooked. Payong kapati lang.

    Actually, not really. I inquired that with lawyers a long time ago. I was informed that unless the image was not being used for commercial purposes there is nothing against exhibiting samples of one's work. Let me post quotes from answers to queries I made with Romulo Mabanta law offices.

    QUERY:

    If a photographer owns the copyright of the images, does it mean he has the right to publish or exhibit the photograph, or is it countered or limited by the rights of the subject?
    Does the photographer need the permission of his subject, where the subject is a person or group of people, for the following uses:

    1.An exhibit of works of the photographer, in a venue open to the public (no charge).
    2.An online portfolio (a web site exhibiting the works of the photographer).
    3.A portfolio card showing samples of the works of the photographer, to be given away (to promote his photographic skills)
    4. Being featured in a magazine or news article, where some samples of his work are shown.


    ANSWER:

    There is no law requiring the photographer to obtain the permission of his subject in order to display or exhibit his works to the public. Neither the Intellectual Property Code (R.A. 8293) nor any relevant treaties to which the Philippines is a party (e.g. Berne Convention, the TRIPS Agreement) requires that a photographer obtain his subject’s permission prior to any public display of the images.

    Since the photographer owns the copyright of the images, he has the following economic rights:

    1.Reproduction of the work or substantial portion of the work;
    2.Dramatization, translation, adaptation, abridgment, arrangement or other transformation of the work;
    3.The first public distribution of the original and each copy of the work by sale or other forms of transfer of ownership;
    4.Rental of the original or a copy of an audiovisual or cinematographic work, a work embodied in a sound recording, a computer program, a compilation of data and other materials or a musical work in graphic form, irrespective of the ownership of the original or the copy which is the subject of the rental; (n)
    5.Public display of the original or a copy of the work;
    6.Public performance of the work; and
    7.Other communication to the public of the work. (Section 177, Intellectual Property Code)

    Even assuming that the photographs were commissioned by particular individuals, the author of the work (in this case, the photographer) still owns the copyright. Section 178.4 of the Intellectual Property Code states that:

    In respect of work commissioned by a person other than the employer of the creator and who pays for it and the work is made in pursuance of the commission, the person who so commissioned the work shall have ownership of the work, but the copyright thereto shall remain with the creator, unless there is a written stipulation to the contrary. (emphasis supplied)

    Similarly, the photographer does not lose his copyright despite the sale of the pictures subject to copyright. The Intellectual Property Code provides:

    SECTION 181. Copyright and Material Object. — The copyright is distinct from the property in the material object subject to it. Consequently, the transfer or assignment of the copyright shall not itself constitute a transfer of the material object. Nor shall a transfer or assignment of the sole copy or of one or several copies of the work imply transfer or assignment of the copyright.

    Section 181 distinguishes between the copyright (the bundle of the author’s exclusive rights) from the physical embodiment of the exercise of that right (which is the material object of the protected work). On account of this provision, a painter may sell his painting but retain his copyright; the painter can, therefore, object to any reproduction of his painting or any use of it as a derivative work. On the other hand, he may retain the painting but assign his copyright separately. Consequently, the author may still distribute the photographs despite the sale of the actual picture.

    However, in at least 2 cases, it is submitted that the subject of the photograph may object to its public distribution or display:

    First, with respect to work which is created during the course of employment, the copyright may belong to the employer under certain circumstances, to wit:

    In respect of work created by an author during and in the course of employment, the copyright shall belong to:
    a)the employee, if the creation of the object of copyright is not a part of his regular duties even if the employee uses the time, facilities and materials of the employer.
    b)the employer, if the work is the result of the performance of his regularly-assigned duties, unless there is an agreement, express or implied, to the contrary. (Section 178.3, Intellectual Property Code)

    This may not be applicable in the present case, as it appears that the photographer actually owns the copyright to the pictures.

    Second, in case the photographs are libelous, then the subject of the photograph may have grounds to object to the picture’s dissemination. The photographer may also be held criminally and civilly liable for the alleged defamation. (See Art. 360, Revised Penal Code)

  4. #4
    Moderator Louie Aguinaldo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pasig City, Philippines
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Although it is not specifically mentioned in the answers to the query. I have been told that as long as you don't use it for commercial purposes such as selling the images, or using it in an advertisement then there is nothing against it.

    I further inquired what if the images are used in a website, or other means that showcase your work. I was told that if the images were displayed to show a sample of your art work, it is different from using the image to appear as if the person was endorsing the product.
    The same lawyer I asked handled the multi-million peso case of a particular celebrity some years ago who sued certain individuals and companies for using a photo of him in an ad without permission. Thus, I am confident they have experience in that regard.

    Of course, if you know that the person requested that the images be used for private consumption only, then its best to honor that - i don't think its worth the headache and bad blood that might be created.

  5. #5
    DPP Member Rosscapili's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Model Release Form - compensate your models and respect their rights pls

    Quote Originally Posted by nino_carandang
    Ross,

    Do you have more or less a model release template to share with the forum members?

    N





    ADULT MODEL RELEASE





    In consideration of my engagement as a model, upon the terms herewith stated, I hereby
    give to________________________________________________ _______________his heirs, legal representatives and assigns, those for
    whom_____________________________________________i s acting, and those acting with his/her authority and permission:



    a) the unrestricted right and permission to copyright and use, re-use, publish, and republish photographic portraits or pictures of me or in which I may be included intact or in part, composite or distorted in character or form, without restriction as to changes or transformations in conjunction with my own or a fictitious name, or reproduction hereof in color or otherwise, made through any and all media now or hereafter known for illustration, art, promotion, advertising, trade, or any other purpose whatsoever.


    b) I also permit the use of any printed material in connection therewith.


    c) I hereby relinquish any right that I may have to examine or approve the completed product or products or the advertising copy or printed matter that may be used in conjunction therewith or the use to which it may be applied.


    d) I hereby release, discharge and agree to save harmless [photographer], his/her heirs, legal representatives or assigns, and all persons functioning under his/her permission or authority, or those for whom he/she is functioning, from any liability by virtue of any blurring, distortion, alteration, optical illusion, or use in composite form whether intentional or otherwise, that may occur or be produced in the taking of said picture or in any subsequent processing thereof, as well as any publication thereof, including without limitation any claims for libel or invasion of privacy.




    e) I hereby affirm that I am over the age of majority and have the right to contract in my own name. I have read the above authorization, release and agreement, prior to its execution; I fully understand the contents thereof. This agreement shall be binding upon me and my heirs, legal representatives and assigns.



    Dated: ________________Signed:___________________________ __________


    Address:__________________________________________ ________________


    City:_____________________________________________ ________________


    State/Zip:______________________________________________ ____________


    Phone:____________________________________________ ________________


    Witness:__________________________________________ _________________

  6. #6
    DPP Member Rosscapili's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Nudity... more on model release topic

    What are deviantART's policies on nudity? perhaps DPP will establish a policy too for future legal issues that may arise.
    FYI, devianART is one of the leading art photo web portal.


    I quote..."Official Nudity Policy
    The following is the official policy on deviantART for the submission of nude art. Nude Art is any type of art work depicting the nude or partially nude human body, or in the case of certain genres of art the depiction of any nude humanoid body sharing the gross anatomical traits of the human body. It is important to note that nude art is not limited to photographybut also includes other art forms such as life-like sketches, drawings, renderings and potentially even explicit and highly descriptive writings (to name a few possibilities).

    First and foremost nudity is allowed to be submitted to deviantART. In all cases involving explicit nudity the submitting artist should mark their submission as mature content and the administration reserves the right to place a mature content tag on any submission which is deemed to require one.
    It is strongly suggested that photographers submitting nude art have the neccessary model release form documentation recorded. While the model release form documentation is not required as of this writing the deviantART administration reserves the right to demand such documentation at any time and to remove any work for which it is demanded but not provided"

  7. #7
    DPP Member Wam Molina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    paranaque
    Posts
    31
    Post Thanks / Like
    ross, sir louie, et al,

    if you ask me, for commercial purposes or otherwise; including showing your artwork online, i'd rather have that model release form signed by the subject, unless he/she would ask, in my case, the negatives and/or original prints...meaning, that i wouldn't have a copy of the images anymore.

    my question is, after having the form signed, do i have to have it notarized?

    a friend photographer of mine who used to shoot for ad agencies says it's not necessary but it wouldn't hurt if i do so.

    thanks
    peace, love, and cosmic vibes,
    wam


  8. #8
    DPP Member estan_cabigas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Makati City
    Posts
    89
    Post Thanks / Like
    granting that a photographer got a model release, is it also inherent to compensate the model?

  9. #9
    Moderator Louie Aguinaldo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pasig City, Philippines
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Of course its always best to play safe. But if you notice the standard model release, it is not applicable for most situations. Notice that it gives the photographer so much right over the usage of the image including even commercial usage. This is perfect if you plan to use the photos for commercial purposes such as advertising, or if you are selling a calendar, etc. But for most cases, it will scare your model.

    Many models come to you to be photographed for their portfolios or who simply want photos of themselves. So why would any of them agree to such a model release that relinquishes any rights they have. Why in the world would someone who comes to you to have their portrait taken, sign such an agreement that gives you the right to sell their images in a product, use it in an advertising campaign or whatever.

    That model release makes sense if you use it for commercial purposes. In fact, not that I am saying it is not important, but it is not even a standard here. Advertising agencies have elaborate contracts with the models they hire for an ad. In fact, the terms are very detailed as to what it could be used for and for how long. Compare that to the model release which has no restrictions whatsoever.

    Magazines, who always use models don't ask for model releases. I shoot for a lot of local magazines and a number of foreign ones and not once was a model release required.

    I may be mistaken, but I believe those model releases are used mainly by photographers who plan to sell their images as stock images. It is not wise for a model to sign a model release that has no restrictions whatsoever as it can actually destroy their career.

    I used to run a modeling agency and took care of 227 models. I would never have a model sign such a model release because it risked destroying their chances of doing any ads. Why? When you come into an agreement with an ad agency or advertiser, there are a lot of stipulations. For example: let's say the model is being hired for a toothpaste ad, there would be stipulations wherein the model must guarantee that she is not under any contract with and will not endorse any other toothpaste brand for x number of years. Now, if that model previously signed an all-encompassing model release such as the one above, then she would be at risk of a breach of contract at any moment. Why? Because the photographer that owns that model release could actually sell the images of the model to the competitor brand and the model no longer has control of it. By signing such a model release, it puts her modeling career at the mercy of the photographer.

    Let's say the photographer sells the image for use in the ad of a really cheap brand of cologne by virtue of the all encompassing rights he has through the model release - no cologne brand would ever use her, not only that - if she is identified with the cheap brand... most other advertisers will avoid using her.

    Thus, though that particular modeling release seems good for a photographer to have, I must say it is quite disadvantageous for the models. Unless you make it very clear to the model what signing it implies, I would even think it is unfair to have them sign it. It would be like asking them to sign a blank check.

    Last month I did an ad shoot for a US company. They needed a similar model release, but we specified that it was to be used specifically for what purpose, for what media, for what company. I would think that is the fair way to do it.

  10. #10
    DPP Member Wam Molina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    paranaque
    Posts
    31
    Post Thanks / Like


    sir louie,

    what about for a gallery exhibit with intentions of selling prints? how should i go about this?
    peace, love, and cosmic vibes,
    wam


 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •