This page contains material from my book, Digital Photographer's Guide to Model Releases. This 288 page, fully-illustrated volume is the most comprehensive book available on the subject, covering everything you ever wanted to know about model releases for photos people, places and things. You may buy a copy here.

About this page

This page contains reference material for my book, Photographers Guide to Model Releases. In various places throughout the book, I cite court cases and other online material, but rather than provide the links within the book itself, which is static, I've provided this page that you're reading here, which can be updated continually. Hence, this page will be more reliable than a printed version. That said, if any of the links provided here are bad, please let me know.

The reader should also be aware that it is impossible to be entirely, 100% technically accurate when discussing the law, especially when it comes to state-by-state considerations within the US or other countries. As the book points out, I used California law as a basis for discussion because it tends to be a well-accepted basis for academic discussion, and also a leader in establishing future legislative trends in the areas discussed here. This can present a problem for those who seek strict legal guidance, who may therefore critique the book's nuanced technicalities. As the author, I have to choose between two masters: one being the teaching of a higher-level concept so that people understand the general principles, and the other being the stickler for accuracy in all cases. Since I needed to use examples to illustrate higher-level concepts, I was bound to be in a situation where I'd have to say things that may not necessarily be true in all states, but I didn't want to "pollute" the text with tons of exceptions and footnotes for those states whose laws may be different. I had to reconcile that there would be, alas, inaccuracies in the final product. (This, despite my frequent disclosures in the book that it's not a legal text, but a business book.)

Links to External Resources

1. Bonner v. Fuji Photo Film—Case showing that sample model release is enforceable.
   Click Here for PDF File

2. Corbis appellate court opinion:
   http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/2007/1stDistrict/August/1060870.pdf

   The estate of James Brown sued Corbis for selling unreleased photos of him to licensees that used the pictures in commercial ways. The uses of the photos required a release, but the question is whether Corbis was permitted to sell such unreleased photos as well. The trial court held that Corbis's action as a stock photo agency does not require a model release, since the site's use of the photos is merely a "vehicle of information", therefore being noncommercial and therefore Brown has no actionable right of publicity either under common law or the Publicity Act. It's legal to sell unreleased photos to others to use, and it's incumbent on them to obtain permission before use (if such use requires permission).

   It should be noted, however, that the appellate court reversed the dismissal of the case based on the lack of discovery evidence for some portions of the case. Namely, Corbis never revealed whom it licensed pictures to.
3. Poultry Farmer Sues Photo Agencies
   http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/newswire/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003642941

   Only a suit has been filed—no decision has yet been made. This is almost assuredly a fishing expedition for settlement money, something that happens a lot. Though the photographer was named, this is no surprise, given the "empty chair" strategy discussed in Chapter 7.

4. Virgin Mobile Sued for not having model release for CC flickr image:
   http://commercial-archive.com/node/139985

5. California Civil Codes:
   http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/civ/3344-3346.html

6. 11th Circuit Court judgment on the use of photos on a cover (Amazon.com)
   http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200415341.pdf

7. Nussenzweig v. diCorcia, 108446.05. (Sale of art isn't commercial in nature.)
   http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1139565912319

8. Prepackaged TV News
   http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/13/politics/13covert.html

9. Church of Scientology Court Cases
   http://www.xenu.net/archive/CourtFiles/

10. NY Times article on over-zealous copyright protection
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/02/business/media/02copyright.html

11. Google upset about MW's inclusion of "google" as a verb:
    http://www.daniweb.com/blogs/entry616.html

12. Rock n Roll Hall of Fame Court Opinion
    images/FAQ/Business/rock-n-roll-case.txt

13. Stanford Fair Use
    http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/index.html

14. Mattel, Inc. et al. v. Walking Mt. Productions.
    http://www.cuttingedgereport.com/casesofthemonth/cases/0401A/sums/Mattel_v_WalkingMt.html

    Mattel sued an artist and his company for, inter alia, copyright and trademark infringement based on the artist's use of BARBIE dolls in a series of photographs depicting them in various unflattering poses, and use of the BARBIE mark in connection with the photo series. The court found that the photos are permitted under "fair use" professions, which precludes Paintiff's trade claims.

15. Baltimore Ravens Trademark Infringement:
    http://www.ober.com/shared_resources/news/published/ip/pub_ip_103103.html

16. Louis Psihoyos sues apple for using his photo idea.
    http://photobusinessforum.blogspot.com/2007/07/louie-vs-apple.html

17. Richard Prince photo of a photo: copy or original?
    http://www.pdn-pix.com/pdn/newswire/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003692111

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/arts/design/06prin.html

    http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2007/12/05/arts/20071206_RICHARDPRINCE_SLIDESHOW_index.html

18. Facebook tries to use unreleased photos of people for ads
    http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/08/are-facebooks-social-ads-illegal/index.html

Click to recommend this page: