Recognizable people in editorial photos

[Ugne Grickeviciute]

Hello,

 

I guess there already were plenty of such kind of questions, but I can't find exact information is it legal to sell photos with recognizable people, shot in a public place, without model release, as editorial? What if a person isn't the main element in a composition, but in a close-up, in a group of people in a public place? I saw photos without any releases where a person even is the main object. I guess I can upload almost anything, but then there is a possibility, that such kind of photos wouldn't be sold at all. Or does it depends on laws of a country, where a picture was taken?

 

I hope somebody has an advise, thank you.

[spacecadet]

Yes.

Just mark as no releases.

[Colin Woods]

Yes. There are lots of photographers who shoot almost only editorial. All sorts of things sell si don't worry about releases. Just make sure that you say that you have neither model nor property relases when you are filling in the image information in AIM. Get out and get shooting. 

[MDM]

42 minutes ago, Ugne Grickeviciute said:

Hello,

 

I guess there already were plenty of such kind of questions, but I can't find exact information is it legal to sell photos with recognizable people, shot in a public place, without model release, as editorial? What if a person isn't the main element in a composition, but in a close-up, in a group of people in a public place? I saw photos without any releases where a person even is the main object. I guess I can upload almost anything, but then there is a possibility, that such kind of photos wouldn't be sold at all. Or does it depends on laws of a country, where a picture was taken?

 

 

 

It does depend on the law of the country where the picture was taken and there is a lot of variation as far as I know. The answers above apply to the UK and presumably Canada where Colin is located. You need to check in relation to the country where the photos were taken. A lot of photographers ignore or are unaware of the laws in different countries it would seem. 

[Michael Ventura]

It is okay in the U.S.  Having said that,  I think there have been cases of successful lawsuits when a photo shows a recognizable person and the caption or story that was associated with that photo, was defamatory.  But that is usually on the publication (unless the caption was written incorrectly by the photographer).  One case I saw, back in the late 1980s, I believe) was when a major U.S. publication ran a stock image, on the cover, of an African American crossing a New York street, wearing a business suit and the photo was illustrating the rise of domestic violence among black business executives.  The man in the photo won that case.  I am pretty sure the photographer was not liable, just the publication.  

 

 

[Ugne Grickeviciute]

Thank you all!

[zxzoomy]

A Wikimedia link with advice on the position in many countries:

 

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements