Brasilnut Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 Hey all, Out of curiosity, has anybody here come across situations when their model-released images were used in situations that may potentially cause the models potential embarrassment (in the best case scenario)? I've recently come across two of my pics which were licensed, not on here, which perhaps a model could take offence and wrote about it on my blog I realise that Alamy's clients are predominately editorial so would probably not apply, but for those that shoot commercial model-released, is it something that potentially worries you and do you notify the client that there's a small risk that the images may be used for "sensitive usage"? Is the small risk enough for some on here avoid commercial model-released altogether? I looked into Alamy's contributor contract and the wording is relatively wide: Quote Alamy’s Customers cannot use photos for pornographic, defamatory, or any other unlawful purposes Unfortunately there's no such definition of what would be "defamatory" within the agreement. Best regards Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TABan Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 There was another case in the USA a few decades back where a photo of a group of guys on Harley Davidsons was used in a textbook to illustrate some sort of psychological defect. It was released, but the folks in the photo were doctors and lawyers. My understanding is they sued and won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlmphotog Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 I'm not an attorney so please don't take what I'm about to say as legal advise. I added this wording to my model releases in an effort to shield me from a lawsuit. "I understand that the images may be used in health and wellness advertisements knowing that such uses may intentionally or unintentionally give rise to the impression that the model suffers from various physical and or emotional ailments, I nevertheless consent to this use." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiskerke Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 4 hours ago, funkyworm said: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/worldnews/6472069/i-sold-my-innocent-picture-to-a-stock-image-site-for-50-and-now-im-the-face-of-bestiality/ Woeoehaahaaaa! (=ROTFL in Dutch) Now can that guy ever sell insurances or cookies again? I'm pretty sure the defamatory in Alamy's license does cover exactly this. - maybe don't do a reverse google. wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobD Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 There used to be a 'sensitive usage' restriction available but I cannot see how that can be done now. You may not want an image used for 'sensitive uses' that are not necessarily defamatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.