egafd.com

I know of at least one video currently being sold where the model not only didn't sign a model release but has repeatedly asked the "producer" to remove the scenes in which she features.

Her requests have so far fallen on deaf ears.

What is the legal position regarding the selling of such footage?

The simple answer is you don't need a model release to sell/use any material you hold copyright on, unless an agreement has been made to the contray.

There will be other factors (US 2257 etc) that may muddy the waters, but basically, unless she can produce evidence stating that the footage wouldn't be published, she's without legs.

Courts won't take "I've changed my mind" as a valid reason either, so legal action would be a folly.

As I understand it UK Law does not recognise an individuals rights over the commercial use of thier image which is why you don't necessarily need a release. But if you don't have a signed release form you could fall foul of the Data Protection Act unless it is classed as 'artistic'.

My advice speak to Joe A and also a solicitor.

Peter, you wrote... "The simple answer is you don't need a model release to sell/use any material you hold copyright on, unless an agreement has been made to the contray." Is this really so?

If I took some nude photos of a girl and tried to sell them to, say, one of Paul Raymond's titles, I doubt they would publish the photos without a signed statement from the girl saying it was OK to publish. The adult industry tends to be run on the basis that model releases are the norm when wanting to publish content, so on the "common practice" argument, isn't it a case of "no model release, no publication"?

Furthermore, there wasn't a change of mind...it was private footage never meant for release which has now been added to a video currently for sale in shops.

With respect, unless you are a lawyer, Peter, I'll choose not to take what you have written too seriously!

The model release isn't a legal document in this country but how do you get copies of the model's ID without paying for a release. Without ID for age verification Paul Raymond and other publishers would not accept material for publication.

Hi all and thanks for the name check...

Bob, here's a few links that might help you








All the above are about copyright which is the major factor. I have a few more for you, if they're not enough... LOL

All of those links are to do with copyright, and not what could be termed a BREACH OF CONFIDENCE. That's why the last person I would take advice from is you, Joe.

After all, didn't you recently lose a court case where you argued that as the copyright holder you could publish photos of a model who didn't want those photos published?

This seems to be a recurring theme with some of you "producers"... you take photos and videos of a girl who, whilst willing to pose, IS'NT willing to have those pictures published, but you publish them anyway with your pathetic cries of "I took them so it's my copyright so I can do what I want"

I pretty much knew the answer to the question before I posted it, but have now received 3 phone calls and one email from qualified lawyers, and I can tell you it's about time some of you stopped wearing the blindfolds and blinkers that seem to suit you so well!

Hear hear to that Bob at last a man who says what he thinks and doesnt mince his words

Sir i salute you and wish you all the sucess with your little problem

The person you dont want to take advice from is of course the 'LORD' of all things porn in the UK so i suggest you at least get him on a cheap retainer of some sorts lmao

EMPEROR