07/10/11 03:00 Model Advice
Model Advice
             
            
              This is a question you see all over the web. Who has
              the superior right to the publication of images after
              a shoot, the photographer or the model? Can a model,
              dissatisfied with the results of a photo session,
              legally bar the photographer from publishing the
              images? This answer comes down to the model's right
              to privacy vs. the photographer's copyright. Let's
              start with the easy scenario: 
if the photographer
              has obtained written consent (e.g., a model
              release) from the model for the exploitation of her
              images, he has the unqualified right to publish them.
              Remember, he already owns the copyright to the
              photos. Combine that with a model release and it darn
              near equals absolute power with respect to
              publication.
              
              
              But that's not usually what happens. In the real
              world, test shoots occur all the time without a model
              release being signed. And relationships that started
              off great in the planning stage can turn sour after
              the shoot and models will ask, or even demand, that
              the photographer refrain from posting their images.
              But does the model have this right, legally?
              
In New York and states with privacy statutes
              similar to New York (e.g., Virginia,
              Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Wisconsin*) the answer
              is "yes," the model can legally prevent publication.
              If the model hasn't signed a written release, it
              doesn't matter whether her conduct indicates consent
              to publication or she orally agreed thereto - the
              photographer has no right to post those images.
              
              
              But in California and Florida, consent to publication
              may be written 
or oral and may also be
              implied via conduct (e.g., emails back and forth
              about the shoot, showing up and sitting for hair and
              make up, etc.), so the photographer can post the
              images despite the model's insistence to the
              contrary. Mind you, we're talking about consent to
              merely have the photos published. Showing up at a
              shoot does not imply consent to have your image used
              to promote a product without getting paid, whether
              you're in California or not.
              
              
              
Conclusion: Photographer and
              model fight after a shoot and model demands that
              photographer "lose her photos" and never publish them
              anywhere. No release has been signed, but conduct and
              conversations show the model intended to shoot with
              the photographer and knew he would publish the
              images. In New York, the model will win this fight,
              but not in California or Florida.
              
              
              *Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-40; Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch.
              214, § 3A; R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-1-28; N.Y. Civ. Rights
              Law §§ 50 to 51; Wis. Stat. Ann. § 895.50.
              
              
              
Source Material for
                   Article...
              
              
              
              
              
               
              
              
              
              
              Tags:Photographer, Model, Disagree over Images, Publication, Right to Privacy