Bryan Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 There is often debate about the need to provide model release for people pics, but what about inanimate objects? In a typical case I take a photo of a friend or relative riding a bike. They agree to provide a model release, but what about the bike? It's their bike, but clearly the copyright for the design resides with the designer/manufacturer. Do I need a property release from the manufacturer before marking the shot as RF? Taking this further, it's unlikely that the the clothes they are wearing were hand made, so another set of companies are involved! The same applies to my house, I own the house, but not the rights to the design. It occurs to me that, taking this very literal approach, very few shots including "property" can be considered for RF use (except maybe very old public buildings with architect long dead and maybe forgotten), This limits RF to photos of the countryside, where any property may be considered incidental to the purpose of the image. Indeed is the need to mark as requiring a property release dependent upon the importance of the object within the image? Is it the principal reason for using the photo, or does it just happen to be present. Clarification would be useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.