3 ms·
Like with every other film/photo professional they need signed releases from all people on their images, to be used later. Or they will be taken to court by so
by rurban 2y ago
Like with every other film/photo professional they need signed releases from all people on their images, to be used later.
Or they will be taken to court by someone sooner or later. Nothing to worry about too much.
Same as using Beatles songs in videos. Which will cost you about $20.000 - $80.000
Biggest problem is that "influencers" have no formal education in publishing and copyright law. This is what we learned in film class in the very first week. But staying a free, not-regulated occupation is more important imho.
- eqvinox 2y agoDo you have any context what legal framework the "release" mechanism is coming from? Is it copyright? Trademark (to your own likeness)? General right to photos showing you?
- ghaff 2y agoIn the US, "commercial use" specifically--as in marketing, advertising, etc.--typically requires a model release from of a person (and stock agencies tend to err on the side of caution in this regard). As I understand it, it's basically a right not to have your image commercially exploited. As I also understand it though, it doesn't keep me from making money as a fine art poster or selling it to a newspaper for editorial use. Obviously there are gray areas. But it's not copyright. As the photographer I hold the copyright in any case.
- rurban 2y agoCopyright and privacy rights 99%. Trademarks certainly not.