Who owns the rights?


Status
Not open for further replies.
Jun 20, 2007
3
0
0
#1
Hi,

I am a beginner in photography... due to the need in my part time career, i got a canon 400D recently....

I hope to get some advices from the bros and sis out here....

Senerio:
I take photo lets say people having picnic at a beach.
Using the photo i make it into a promotion advertisment selling picnic food... :sweat:

Qns:
Will i be in any kind of trouble?? :dunno:

Appreciate advice and comments...
Many thanks

Hope to learn from you guys here....
 

V

vince123123

Guest
#2
Nope, no trouble unless the photograph is defamatory or otherwise attracts criminal liability (e.g. outrage of modesty).

If it is a normal run of the mill photograph, no problems.

Of course if you are shooting some burly gangsters, there might be some other considerations.

Hi,

I am a beginner in photography... due to the need in my part time career, i got a canon 400D recently....

I hope to get some advices from the bros and sis out here....

Senerio:
I take photo lets say people having picnic at a beach.
Using the photo i make it into a promotion advertisment selling picnic food... :sweat:

Qns:
Will i be in any kind of trouble?? :dunno:

Appreciate advice and comments...
Many thanks

Hope to learn from you guys here....
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,903
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#4
You may get yourself/your company into trouble for using it for advertisement...

if the face is recognizable, you need ask the person to sign a model release.

if any building is recognizable, you need to get a property release.

if any brand name, logo is recognizable, which you don't intend to advertise, you need to removed it from the picture.

but if the images is use for press release for event news, eg reportage, you may use as it is.
 

garou12

Deregistered
May 15, 2007
1,644
0
0
#5
copyright law states that you as the photog owns the copy right to the shots. But if you intend to make $$$ of it you must at least get permission from the subjects involved in the shot so they later cannot sue you for using unauthorised use of their faces etc.
 

Leongfm

New Member
Feb 12, 2003
201
0
0
www.pbase.com
#6
I know releases from persons/building owners are required for commercial use of photos in countries like the US, Europe, etc. Are they required in Singapore as well?
 

#7
I know releases from persons/building owners are required for commercial use of photos in countries like the US, Europe, etc. Are they required in Singapore as well?
What makes Singapore different from other countries?

Model release is model release. You need it everywhere you go.

No ad agency will want to touch a photo without model release and property release.

But if you use the photo with the people out of focus and totally unrecognizable, you may be able to get away with it.
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,903
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#8
What makes Singapore different from other countries?

Model release is model release. You need it everywhere you go.

No ad agency will want to touch a photo without model release and property release.

But if you use the photo with the people out of focus and totally unrecognizable, you may be able to get away with it.
maybe LSL is a pubic figure, don't need model release, how about ps his face into the advertisements?? :think:


:bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:
 

nikontiger

Deregistered
Feb 19, 2006
187
0
0
East Coast
#9
What makes Singapore different from other countries?

Model release is model release. You need it everywhere you go.

No ad agency will want to touch a photo without model release and property release.

But if you use the photo with the people out of focus and totally unrecognizable, you may be able to get away with it.
Yes, indeed, a model's and property release is not optional, its a must, to cover yourself. You may never know when the lawsuit letter will arive at your location. One way out of this is, to take the photo from an angle that hides any recognisable face...ask any good stock photog, and there are many technques. I am from a microstock company, and I once had my image rejected because of a kid's shoe, which had three stripes, the copyright design of Adidas, and this stripes can only be seen at 100% zoom in the PS.

Some good microstock company have technical references built by its members over the years, in these references, it covers many wellknown monuments and brand names world wide, including our Merlion, on what application the photograph may be used , pertaining to copyright issues.
 

V

vince123123

Guest
#10
The difference is because specific legislation was enacted in the United States that makes model releases necessary because it grants specific rights and remedies to individuals who have had their photos taken and used commercially.

No such legislation is enacted in Singapore, and there are no cases which have decided that model releases apply in Singapore.

Whether an ad agency will want to touch the photo or not is a commercial decision, it may not necessarily be supported in law.

What makes Singapore different from other countries?

Model release is model release. You need it everywhere you go.

No ad agency will want to touch a photo without model release and property release.

But if you use the photo with the people out of focus and totally unrecognizable, you may be able to get away with it.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom