Do i need a model release for street shots?

[vince123123]

That's because the law is so undeveloped in this area that they probably dont even know the answer themselves. In fact, even in areas of law which are supposedly in their domain, they give wrong answers (e.g. civil case instead of Magistrate's complaint etc).

i wrote to the SPF and their answer was more slippery than soap on teflon, even after i pressed the issue. after a third attempt to clarify the point they ignored me altogether.

 

[vince123123]

The IPOS site merely talks about copyright, which is a separate cause of action from this whole concept on model releases. In the Hanis Hussey case, the person who published the photo didn't have copyright and copyright infringement was one of the causes of action.

Where you own copyright in the work, that demolishes that one ground, and you are probably with the defamation ground, which honestly, isn't very easy to prove.

If asking for a model release will break the project, and if the project is important enough, I'll just forgo it if I were you. The risks and costs of someone trying to sue you in an uncertain case is so high that the risk to you becomes comparatively small. See what happened to that whole ruckus kicked up by that model Niki, only to die a quiet detah.

Thanks for clearing things up vince, yes the whole model release issue will make or break my project, so i'm very anxious to find out about such issues in singapore.

After going through the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore website, this is the closest i can find from their FAQ:

I provide photography services. Do I own the copyright to the photos that I take for my clients? If I don't, is there any way that I can own the copyright? I want to showcase the best photos in my website and brochures.
In general, clients who pay for your services own the copyright to the photos taken. However, you have limited rights in that if the photos are required for any particular purpose (e.g. a corporate client wants glamour shots of the senior management, to use in its annual report) made known to you in advance. Your clients should tell you and you are entitled to prevent the photos from being used for other purposes.

In practice, however, many photographers have their own terms of engagement with clients. The parties are free to have their own agreement, which automatically overrides the above default position. Thus, for example, you and your clients can mutually agree with your clients that you will own the copyright in the photos but that your clients can use the photos for certain purposes; or that your clients own the copyright but you have the licence to reproduce the photos in your website and brochures.


It doesn't say anything about non client-photography issues. As such is the problem in my case, as well as a lot of casual photographers i think.

 

[AReality]

All this just for a simple question? Why not just get a one-step easy solution instead of wondering whether the law in one country needs it or not? Isn't it more simple to just get a release (you can even get a template on the Internet and fix it to your requirements) - if it's for stock agencies, make sure you've covered what is required. Carry a few of them around with you ( it doesn't weigh much) and just politely explain what you're doing and ask for their autograph.

The problem with this is when it becomes the norm, people/clients will request for a release even though 99% of the time it's not needed. And this will cause more trouble and fustration for everyone.

.

 

[ortega]

the model release is just an agreement between the model and the client
on who owns what and who can or cannot do what with the images

it is a piece of paper used just in case you need to cover your behind

you don't need it, but it is always good to have

 

[vince123123]

Yeap, especially those people who go to the Internet for their information, and end up relying on webpages providing information originating from the USA, and then assuming it also applies everywhere.

The problem with this is when it becomes the norm, people/clients will request for a release even though 99% of the time it's not needed. And this will cause more trouble and fustration for everyone.

.

 

[vince123123]

The original sense of a model release isn't really so much on who owns what and who can or cannot do what with the images. The concept of model releases was a result of specifically enacted legislation in the United States prohibiting commercial usage of photographs unless such a release is obtained. A model release in its original incarnation is intended to be that, not a bilateral agreement.

This has slowly morphed into agreements governing usage and some even call agreements where the Photographer agrees NOT to use for certain purposes, as "model releases", when such labelling is in fact, inaccurate.

EDIT: The best part is that such morphing actually occurs more in countries which do not have laws governing model releases, such as in Singapore.

the model release is just an agreement between the model and the client
on who owns what and who can or cannot do what with the images

it is a piece of paper used just in case you need to cover your behind

you don't need it, but it is always good to have

 

[vince123123]

The question is, what if your request is refused, do you then take the view that "Oh ****, no release, can't do anything liao", or do you take the view that since the issue of releases is questionable under Singapore law, I'll go ahead anyway?

Also, what if the subject says, "Release? okay, add another X% to the fees", what do you do then?

It is of course easy if your subject is cooperative and gives no further thought to that little scribble. It is a different question altogether if you encounter some resistance, or attempts to capitalise on an additional request. which is what this is all about anyway.

I doubt it's about laziness in asking for that scribble.

Most professional agencies/clients already ask for releases. So what if it becomes the norm? It is already the norm in a lot of countries. Also, personally, I rather get the hassle over for a signature than risk the probability that my photos won't be able to be used because I didn't get a little scribble on a piece of paper.

 

[vince123123]

I think it may be more apt to replace the bold/underlined words with "then you're in for some action from me". The photographer may or may not be screwed, but you're surely entitled to commence action against him and see how the courts decide.

Just as a photographer may need a lawyer to advise on the issue of model releases (and trust me, I doubt many lawyers really know the answer - and it isn't an issue on Contract Law if no contract was signed), the subject would also require a lawyer to advise on his whether he has a cause of action against the photographer. I guess it works both ways.

If it really comes down to it and you need a lawyer to have a look at it (Contract Law)....pay for it! You guys can spend hundreds of dollars on camera film, but can't pay for the one thing that just might cover your backside! So much questions for something that is so small, what a waste of time. I actually find it odd how I used to do model shoot here in singapore and photographers will actually tell me that they don't need a release. Okay, well...whatever. If I see my photos on commercial sites, then you're screwed! haha!

 

[vince123123]

Hehehe, after so many posts then you noticed me arh! Hehe, nice to hear from you again Catch up with you one day on MSN or something hehe Long time no hear

LOL...hi Vince! I remember you. WEll, my response to that would be well, if you dont' have a release and the subject refuses to sign one, that honestly, you shouldn't trash the photo. Simple as that. Straight down the line for me. I also know that this has been thing about release have been asked and debated for gods knows how long. Also, just a though, maybe taking angels or Silhouete it. There are ways around it, and it's the photographer who bloody hell better have good PR skills! Jokes!

Anyhow, last you hear from me about this issue....you konw me well enough, i'm all for releaes!

 

[airforce1]

Another model release primer

http://www.apogeephoto.com/mag4-6/mag4-6model_releases.shtml

 

[Trigger Happy]

Another model release primer

http://www.apogeephoto.com/mag4-6/mag4-6model_releases.shtml

that looks useful but then again, its written in the American context again isn't it? if someone can pry a sensible response from SPF then that would be a winner for all photographers. i tried, but failed...

 

[vince123123]

SPF will not advise you on points of law, and definitely not when it doesn't even involve criminal laws.