Thread: Photos...and permission again...

I know this topic has been discussed in a mess of different ways...but it's recently come up for me for the first time and I'm not sure how to handle this.
I hold a monthly showcase at the local Moroccan Restaurant. This past show, one of my students brought a friend who is a serious hobbyist photographer. I didn't know about his plan to attend previous to seeing him snapping photos during the show and during the open dancing alllll night long.
Aside from taking photos of me, he also shot my students...during their solos AND during the open dancing with the audience...allll night long.
After he left, my student boasted that her friend was putting together series of photos on disc to sell for charity. While I explained my own practice of doing for the community, I told her that her friend was not permitted to do this without obtaining a release.
Today I received a link to this guy's website and files of these photos (from him). The photos are 'ok', but I am feeling STEAMED that they were taken (and in such great quantity) and published on his website without permission.
Do I have the right to ask him to remove the photos from his website and also tell him that he cannot create or sell the disc he's planning to make for charity?
Help appreciated...
Gia

Yes, I think you do. SELLING someone image without their permission is wrong. I would email him and let him know that you didn't give him permission to use YOUR dance or image for his gain (even if it is for CHAIRITY). If that doesn't work I would threaten him. That would probably work.

Thanks...I'm very upset about this...not just for me, but for my students, who I was giving a 'safe' enviroment to perform...
I did email just after posting and reminded him that, while I am sure he meant no harm, that he never asked permission to photograph much less permission to include me & the other performers on his website and his DVD...I've asked him to remove the photos...we'll see what happens...furious...:angry:
Gia

He is clearly not that serious of a photographer.

The simple fact is that since the dancers are clearly visible and recognizable in the pictures, he can not sell them (regardless of where the money goes) without model releases from all of the dancers involved. I would politely ask him to go about acquiring those model releases before he tries to sell the CD.

I'm not sure about your legal rights here. Since the event was held in a public venue, you may not have any rights to the images. The photographer usually has the rights to the images he shoots, not the model, and if you are performing in a public place that allows photography, you do not have any grounds to make any demands.

If the event had been a private one, where you sold tickets and expressly forbid the use of flash photography, it would be different. Since this guy is connected to your community, he's not being considerate, but he's not doing anything illegal either, and frankly, I don't think there's much you can do legally.

I think THTX is right about the legalities, though ethically I'm with the other camp.

The exception that might apply here, though, is if the photographer is using the pics for financial gain.
Here's a page that explains pretty simply:
http://www.apogeephoto.com/mag4-6/ma...releases.shtml

Seems to me financial gain applies here -- doesn't really matter what he does with the gain afterwards -- whether he donates it to charity or buys himself a sportscar is irrelevant, he's selling your image for cash.

Originally Posted by tamrahennatx

I'm not sure about your legal rights here. Since the event was held in a public venue, you may not have any rights to the images. The photographer usually has the rights to the images he shoots, not the model, and if you are performing in a public place that allows photography, you do not have any grounds to make any demands.

You're half right. The subject of the picture does not have any ownership of the picture. And he does legally have the right to take pictures in public for personal use. So even though it's rude for him to take pictures without asking, it's not illegal. He can hang the up in his own house, or make a scrapbook for himself or his friend, and he's in the clear.

That said, private people (i.e. non-celebrities) do retain the legal right to control the use of their likeness, i.e. pictures in which you are identifiable cannot be used commercially/promotionally without your consent.

If he is going to sell those pictures, he is using your likeness commercially. A lot of people think that if you are giving the proceeds to charity it doesn't count as commercial use, but it is. Especially in this case, where selling pictures of the dancers is basically implicitly saying that these dancers are supporting that particular charity publicly. It might be a worthy cause, and maybe the dancers would have agreed to allow their likenesses to be used for the fundraiser if they were asked. But the point is, they legally have the right to control whether or not they want to be seen as associated with that organization.

Originally Posted by tamrahennatx

I'm not sure about your legal rights here. Since the event was held in a public venue, you may not have any rights to the images. The photographer usually has the rights to the images he shoots, not the model, and if you are performing in a public place that allows photography, you do not have any grounds to make any demands.

If the event had been a private one, where you sold tickets and expressly forbid the use of flash photography, it would be different. Since this guy is connected to your community, he's not being considerate, but he's not doing anything illegal either, and frankly, I don't think there's much you can do legally.

Well...as I mentioned...the event is held in a restaurant that is open to the public. But the show is open ONLY to ticket holders...I wouldn't forbid photography for those using cameras to shoot their girlfriends, wives or daughters dancing...but...as the others have stated so beautifully (and thank you all...I feel MUCH better that you've voiced what I was thinking!) is that he's using these photos for gain and photographed with that intention without my permission.
He hasn't yet responded...I'll keep everyone up to date...
Gia

Thank you again to everyone who offered advice and support. The guy removed the photos with a little gripe via email...didn't understand the 'fuss'. I am just happy to have preserved my rights, and the rights of my students.
Gia

Originally Posted by Lauren_

I think THTX is right about the legalities, though ethically I'm with the other camp.

The exception that might apply here, though, is if the photographer is using the pics for financial gain.
Here's a page that explains pretty simply:
http://www.apogeephoto.com/mag4-6/ma...releases.shtml

Seems to me financial gain applies here -- doesn't really matter what he does with the gain afterwards -- whether he donates it to charity or buys himself a sportscar is irrelevant, he's selling your image for cash.

I'd add that obviously photographers snap and sell photos of celebrities all the time and seldom do they have "model releases" or any other type of release -- do ya think Britney signed off on some of those really unflattering photos of her that have surfaced over the past year or so? Do ya think the photographers who took them didn't profit from them?

So, -- yeah, it's rude, but not necessarily illegal . . . .

That's because you only need a model release for "commercial usage", not "editorial" usage. Despite the fact that in most of our minds they hardly qualify, pictures printed in tabloids fall under the rules for journalistic usage (oddly enough, the photographers can still get paid for the pictures and it's still ok) and so model releases are not required.

Another complicating legal note- If the photo is of a dancer PERFORMING- anything created from that performance is under the copyright of the dancer.

If the dancer is not dancing. and the dancers has not told the photographer to NOT take their photo- than any art/photograph created by that photographer, using that persons image, can be sold as art or editorial without permission. Selling for commercailly or using in a porfolio to sell his services is illegal.

This guy does not have legal rights in this case. I have sympathy in that, the copyright laws are confusing. I am sure he had the best of intentions. Simply time for him to be educated on how to go about things.