model release???????

[paul jones]

It's a civil case, and the judge would be asked to decide, on the balance of probabilities, who was right.

A professional model, doing professional modelling at her normal levels, for a photographer, for money - it would be a hard ask to get a judge to decide that she was in the right. He'd be bound to determine an implied term of contract in favour of publication.

[lindsey]

Yes Paul thats true its civil but i wasnt suggesting persuing a courtcase - the photograher has obviously uploaded the images to a website. By doing that he has licenced them to publish - so its the host website thats liable not the photographer. And i can bet if you cant provide proof of rights they will remove it.



P.S.

Just interested to know - all you people that said release not needed, are you publishing images of models without releases ?

[rgb]

Of course we all have model releases. It's like keeping IDs for proof of age: there's no legal requirement to have them in the UK (there IS in the USA) , but they quickly resolve a dispute if it ever arose.

[Cenobitez]

I'm totally not getting where your coming from.

The photographer owns the rights tho, he took them, he owns them under UK law, release or no release, all he needs to do is prove he took them.

Its the complainants job to prove the photographer DOESNT have rights, innocent until proven guilty and all that ?

If holly owned copyright she'd slam the hosting company with notice, then she'd instruct her council to send a 'Letter of Claim' to person, you'd prob end up at break even maybe a grand or 2 up if they give in there and then, else you'll be losing money if you have to mitigate losses on copyright theft.

In my experience 99% of hosts would remove the site within hours (I always embed an image that I can see when its loaded) because thats their safe harbour.

I've only come across 1 host that I have had to bend over, lube up and give them some straight up cock to ass action, most others soon as they get proof zap it.

If you wanna check it are who I use, speak to a chap called Riyaz but I'm sure any one there can give you some advice.

[videokim]

Was you paid? or was it shared content etc? its hard to stop companies using material if they have the masters e.g. orginal photos & tapes as model releases are not worth a light in the UK.
If its a private film you film it or get another person you can trust to do it & keep the masters & give them a DVD copy, posing for any videographer/photographer means with or without a model release that material stands a good chance of being seen.

John

P.S. if you were paid you will stand no chance in court & the court would ask why you are still a model if being seen may cause you damage in your personnal life, think first before doing anything to drastic.

[BNMedia]

Holly, just state your terms to the tog and threaten to go around and kick his balls in if he doesn't agree!

[paul jones]

Of course, that might be exactly what he's hoping for

[marshman]

I agree 100% with John but what is your issue here, was you tricked and not paid or upset you done a paid shoot but told it was private ?

Barry

[BNMedia]

Yeah, there's some right wierdo's out there, lol!
Oh yeah, I'm one of 'em.
WHOOPS!!!