Legal question - footage without release form

[AyJay]

Out of interest - what would the potential legal ramifications be if you were to do a shoot, that was unpublished, but later on decide to put the footage on say pornhub for example for free viewing?
Could you be sued? Or, as you are not charging for it, are you in the clear?

[m100]

surely financial gain is neither here nor there it's whether the participants are aware that it may be available for others to view or whether they were under the belief that it was a private shoot.

[photo_man69]

see what the site says about uploads, there's usually an FAQ somewhere..

[AyJay]

If it's a paid modelling shoot then surely there must be an associated risk that at some stage the footage will go public?

Just curious, shot many vids but none have a release form and wouldn't want to release anything if I could get in any legal trouble.....

[m100]

i think the best people to answer this are the likes of one eyed jack

[sparky]

Whatever the legal position if at the time of the shoot you told the model(s) that the content was only for your private collection then you distribute it, here specifically upload it up to a website, it is a fundamental breach of trust.

I too think it is irrelevant if the viewing is free or requires payment.

With proposals like this is it any wonder that sourcing models for private shoots to open leg and toys level at a sensible rate gets ever more difficult.

[Snappy]

I think being sued is the least of your worries. Arguably, publishing without a release could fall into the same category as "revenge porn" if the model found out and decided to claim that you posted it without her consent out of spite.

There is a good summary on

[Jonboy]

Hi,
As an amateur who over the years has shoot many models to levels over their advertised limits I would say this, when booking a model and stating the level, I explain that there will be no advertising of the shoot or discussion about the content and make a financial offer. In the past pre-2005 I would say I had a 50% take up rate, after then it fell till by 2010 it was less than 10%.
The reason for this was models were aware that the confirmation of no publication was just a statement to get the model to pose as required and either on the public forums or private websites the images would appear.
This action has messed things up for a lot of amateurs and taken away the goodwill of a lot of models, to you I would suggest, do not consider it as it harms the industry which you are part of.

[joe king]

Assume nothing.

[IainT]

Copyright and contracts are a complex issue.

Essentially, in the absence of paperwork to the contrary, the producer owns and has absolute rights over all material, whether there was payment made to any party and whether it generates income is irrelevant. For there to be any case for legal action by any parties involved, they would have to prove in court that on the balance of probability a particular agreement existed and that the defendant was in breach of that agreement.

Notwithstanding any of the above, anyone who promises a model privacy and then does the opposite is a slimeball of the lowest order and as other posters intimated, creates mistrust between models and collectors and is ultimately spoiling things for decent collectors who honour their agreements.