2 ms·
The rights you are describing are not moral rights. Moral rights belong to the artist, the photographer for example. He can say whether his work is being used i
by passepartout 13y ago
The rights you are describing are not moral rights. Moral rights belong to the artist, the photographer for example. He can say whether his work is being used in a way to hurt his honor or reputation. The rights of the person involved in the picture are called privacy and publicity rights which can be waived by the Licensor as long as he has obtained them from the original person exposed in the picture. See this case for example: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Chang_v._Virgin_Mobile http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Chang_v._Virgin_Mobile
- drakaal 13y agoYes I combined two changes in the same comment for brevity. You also waive all of the personalities rights with this new version.
- passepartout 13y agoIf you have them. The rights are originally held by the third person, not the photographer (to keep your example). If that person has licensed them to the Licensor/photographer, then they will be considered waived. In any other case, the third person holds them and can have a valid argument.