Indemnities - advice please

[Bob J]

indemnities

1. You will indemnify, defend (at the request of Alamy) and hold Alamy and its sub-licensees and assigns harmless against any prejudice, damage, liability or costs (including reasonable lawyers' fees) which any of the indemnified parties incur arising from or in respect of any claim that there has been a breach of your representations, obligations and warranties in this contract. This paragraph will remain in force after the termination of this contract.

 

Can someone advise please. Regarding the above; I have a close friend who has found himself in a horrid situation. He took a photo at a WW2 re-enactment (a paid event) and that included a man dressed as a german soldier. Apparently that person  has now spotted the photo and wants it taken down (Alamy has done so). He has also mentioned seeking compensation. Alamy have pretty much stated that he will bear the cost of  any Alamy  settlement. Does this seem right to you. For starters there are hundreds of similar photos on the site and they pretty much all have the details recorded; that they are re-enactors and in most cases there are no model releases in place. Does it make any difference that this was a paid event? 

[Steve F]

16 minutes ago, Bob J said:

indemnities

1. You will indemnify, defend (at the request of Alamy) and hold Alamy and its sub-licensees and assigns harmless against any prejudice, damage, liability or costs (including reasonable lawyers' fees) which any of the indemnified parties incur arising from or in respect of any claim that there has been a breach of your representations, obligations and warranties in this contract. This paragraph will remain in force after the termination of this contract.

 

Can someone advise please. Regarding the above; I have a close friend who has found himself in a horrid situation. He took a photo at a WW2 re-enactment (a paid event) and that included a man dressed as a german soldier. Apparently that person  has now spotted the photo and wants it taken down (Alamy has done so). He has also mentioned seeking compensation. Alamy have pretty much stated that he will bear the cost of  any Alamy  settlement. Does this seem right to you. For starters there are hundreds of similar photos on the site and they pretty much all have the details recorded; that they are re-enactors and in most cases there are no model releases in place. Does it make any difference that this was a paid event? 

I think the Forum may need more info to answer you. Does your friend know what the rules of the re-enactment were in regards to photography?

 

It sounds like a bit of a hustle to me. What damages does the photographed person think that they have incurred? Presumably there was press there too. I would be tempted to ask what law has been infringed and ignore it unless a solicitor gets involved.

[TeeCee]

25 minutes ago, Bob J said:

indemnities

1. You will indemnify, defend (at the request of Alamy) and hold Alamy and its sub-licensees and assigns harmless against any prejudice, damage, liability or costs (including reasonable lawyers' fees) which any of the indemnified parties incur arising from or in respect of any claim that there has been a breach of your representations, obligations and warranties in this contract. This paragraph will remain in force after the termination of this contract.

 

Can someone advise please. Regarding the above; I have a close friend who has found himself in a horrid situation. He took a photo at a WW2 re-enactment (a paid event) and that included a man dressed as a german soldier. Apparently that person  has now spotted the photo and wants it taken down (Alamy has done so). He has also mentioned seeking compensation. Alamy have pretty much stated that he will bear the cost of  any Alamy  settlement. Does this seem right to you. For starters there are hundreds of similar photos on the site and they pretty much all have the details recorded; that they are re-enactors and in most cases there are no model releases in place. Does it make any difference that this was a paid event? 

I’m no legal expert, however…
Unless there were explicit instructions re “no photography of this event” then I cannot see the complainant has any case at all. Assuming this was in the UK, your friend was free to photograph this (presumably public) event, and submit them to Alamy. In the end, compensation for what exactly –he/she has acted within the law, and no harm has been done.

[Bob J]

Hi Steve, I was at the same event and I cannot say what the rules were - we did not make any particular note of it. There was certainly nothing overtly banning photographers or warning any of us.

 

I tend to agree that it may well be a hustle. On the photo for sale it was clearly annotated that this was an actor. The scary thing is that I would also have posted a similar image but mine was blurred! 

Edited May 10, 2021 by Bob J

[Steve F]

6 minutes ago, Bob J said:

Hi Steve, I was at the same event and I cannot say what the rules were - we did not make any particular note of it. There was certainly nothing overtly banning photographers or warning any of us.

 

I tend to agree that it may well be a hustle. On the photo for sale it was clearly annotated that this was an actor. The scary thing is that I would also have posted a similar image but mine was blurred! 

 

https://www.blpawards.org/competition/photo-rights

[meanderingemu]

24 minutes ago, TeeCee said:

 

 

I’m no legal expert, however…
Unless there were explicit instructions re “no photography of this event” then I cannot see the complainant has any case at all. Assuming this was in the UK, your friend was free to photograph this (presumably public) event, and submit them to Alamy. In the end, compensation for what exactly –he/she has acted within the law, and no harm has been done.

 

 

 

isn't it possible that if it was a paid event it may have been on private grounds for the event? 

[TeeCee]

22 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

isn't it possible that if it was a paid event it may have been on private grounds for the event? 

Quite likely it was, but I see no grounds for "compensation". Any event of this nature is most likely to have a lot of photographers in attendance, both professional and amateur. Promoters of the re-enactment will most likely have sought publicity both prior to and after the event. Unless they expressly prohibited photography, I cannot see the complainant has any case. I'd entirely ignore this unless, as Steve says, solicitors get involved.

[meanderingemu]

8 minutes ago, TeeCee said:

Quite likely it was, but I see no grounds for "compensation". Any event of this nature is most likely to have a lot of photographers in attendance, both professional and amateur. Promoters of the re-enactment will most likely have sought publicity both prior to and after the event. Unless they expressly prohibited photography, I cannot see the complainant has any case. I'd entirely ignore this unless, as Steve says, solicitors get involved.

 

i wonder how that works since the Contributor Defend option has to be initiated by Alamy not reverse.  So Alamy could decide to just settle and OP's friend would be on the hook, if i am reading the clause properly. 

Edited May 10, 2021 by meanderingemu

[geogphotos]

I suggest that you/your friend informs Alamy that you expect them to refer this complainant to  your friend/you so that you can indeed take responsibility and relieve Alamy of any burden.

 

The last thing you want is for Alamy to incur costs that you are contractually bound to pay for.

Edited May 10, 2021 by geogphotos

[geogphotos]

If a person chooses to dress up in a costume at an event open to the public I can't see that there can be any objection to being photographed.  As long as photography wasn't explicitly barred as a condition of entry, or photography for 'commercial use' or whatever. 

 

I wonder what the organisers of the event say about it?

 

I'm interested because I also have photos like this taken at events. The people knew that I was photographing them but I didn't get a chance to explain about stock.

 

The only trouble I've ever had was on National Trust property and then I emailed the re-enactment group and they were delighted to give permission. The whole point of their activity is education and to inform the public.  They spend all day posing for photos.

 

 

Edited May 10, 2021 by geogphotos

[TeeCee]

28 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

 

i wonder how that works since the Contributor Defend option has to be initiated by Alamy not reverse.  So Alamy could decide to just settle and OP's friend would be on the hook, if i am reading the clause properly. 

Possible I agree, but highly unlikely as there is no case for compensation. Any actor at a public event is likely to have their photo taken, and that'll like as not pop up in the local paper or on social media somewhere or other. As I said earlier, I'd be extremely surprised if the event organisers did not request publicity at the outset, which would rather blow the actor's case out of what was already very shallow water.

[IanDavidson]

For there to be any legal claim there needs to be a tort or harm to the individual.  As has been stated we don’t have sufficient information but it is hard to see what hurt has been done.  If the picture has been taken as news or reportage there are strong legal defences 

 

For a claim to be made the individual has to show that some hurt has been done to them, reputational, physical, mental trauma etc.  

[AndrewP]

Was the photo in question licensed and published or was is only seen on Alamy as being available to be licensed? I can't see how having the photo on the Alamy website would constitute publication for which damages could be awarded especially as it was taken down as soon as requested. Alamy have also published a blog post about what action can be taken if you find yourself photographed for a stock photo.

 

This is the blog post:

https://www.alamy.com/blog/see-stock-photo

Edited May 11, 2021 by AndrewP
URL added