Hey MODELS: Have you done a shoot where you told the photographer that you needed to update your portfolio, promote yourself etc, and then after he/she refuses to allow you to use your images for those means? Well: The Implied Usage License IMPLIED USAGE RIGHTS [US] You won’t find it in Title 17, but US law allows you to get a usage license “by implication” from what is said, or what is done, or the circumstances of a shoot. Here’s an example: Suppose you call up a photographer and tell him you are a model who needs some pictures done to market yourself with. He agrees to do them, you shoot, and he gives you the pictures. Congratulations, you have a limited usage license from the photographer. (We need to point out that lots of photographers don’t know that, and believe they have complete control of “their pictures” in such circumstances. Remember the part about “no rule that says a model can’t be smarter than the photographer”? Now you are.) By law, when you and a photographer shoot and he gives you pictures, he is obligated to let you use them for the purpose for which you agreed on the shoot. What’s more, if you give him “consideration” (meaning something of value, like money or a model release, or your services as a model for him to practice, if he says he needs it), once that license is given to you, he can’t take it back. It’s yours. You can go off and merrily do whatever you and he agreed you were going to do in the first place, even if he decides he doesn’t like it. So now, you can use those pictures on your comp cards, put them on your modeling website and give them to your agency without worrying about some other license. You already have one. Now, proving this if it was all said vocally, may be hard, BUT seeing as most is done through some recorded form ie. email, social media site etc, you have all the proof needed without needing a signed useage agreement. (You can thank me later)
Posted on: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 03:11:55 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015