Only Fans & Patreon

Of course all fees and usage rights should be agreed and recorded in advance of a shoot, however future-proofing that agreement may be the trickiest point. A lot of people will currently be monetising images that were created before the explosion of premium content sites. Whatever agreements exist could not have foreseen this situation.

Another issue is how specific agreements need to be. Ostensibly OnlyFans and Patreon are the same model - subscribers pay for access to premium content from creators. However OnlyFans has a reputation as a sleazy porn site, whereas Patreon is regarded as a more artistic, professional site. (Neither reputation is wholly accurate). So while there may be agreement about the type of platform that content can be used on, do we need to go further and stipulate actual sites, to prevent any possible damage to reputation (perceived or otherwise)?

I think we all need to be a lot more proactive about discussing and agreeing these terms upfront.

tandi Yes and no. I'm not a lawyer and someone please correct me if I'm wrong but after a fair bit of reading my understanding is that the photographer (technically, the person who actuated the shutter) owns the copyright to the image.

However, copyright is not the only right involved, and the model (or any identifiable person) owns the right to their likeness and that is not immediately transferred with the photo. Without a model release the photographer owns the image, but not the right to the model's likeness and therefore cannot use the image commercially without a release.

Edited by emptyw

tandi said

Caitlyn. said

tandi i’m sorry to be blunt but if i didn’t sign a model release that explicitly states my images would be put for profit on such a site, then my nude images shouldn’t be sold in a pornographic way.

I appreciate that, but from what I have gleamed unless a model specifies that the photographer cannot do certain things with images a photographer paid that model to pose for, then as the owner of the copyright the photographer is allowed to do anything they want with their work. I would have a conversation with the photographer and see if the photographer actually uploaded them to the sites you have seen them on, if they did, ask if they would remove them?

Other people know far more than me about photography specific copyright.

Tandi, you are correct. Copyright legally belongs to the photographer by default - unless there is an overriding contract in place (for example if the photographer was commissioned by a publication, their contract might claim image copyright ownership).

Model releases have no real legal standing in the UK (though many consider them advisable as evidence that a shoot was consensual, the model was of age, etc).

If a model doesn't want their nudes posted, exhibited or sold, they either shouldn't pose for nudes in the first place, or should agree a written contract with the photographer.

If a model is uncomfortable with how images are used, they should approach the photographer politely and request a 'take-down'. They have no "right" unless a contract existed. A good majority of amateurs will happily agree rather than cause distress to the model. Professionals are running a business and if they have paid a model to pose they are likely to be less sympathetic.

Of course others also harvest images and may re-post them without the photographer's consent. In that case the photographer can try requesting a take-down, but how likely they are to succeed depends on each site and where it is geographically based.

emptyw

Since typing this I've tried to find a clear source for the relevant UK law and I can't!

Treat it with an evening bigger pinch of salt than one usually would with internet forum legal information 🤣

Jacktheclicker

Lucky them.

50/50?

Not been a problem for me.

Caitlyn.

It is possible this article may be slightly useful.

https://purpleport.com/articles/967/model-release-do-i-need-one-should-i-sign-one-england-wales-1/

Particularly the first paragraph.

IANAL but you might write one, or have an agency write one, or a lawyer, specifying the terms on which you and a particular photographer make a particular set of photographs.

A non-trivial task, something which might put off very ordinary people who like making photographs, and apart from the practical difficulty of enforcing it the remedy you could get seems likely to be the small amount of money identifiably obtained by the extra-contractual use. (But that isn't a legal opinion on quantum and you should give it no more credence than it deserves.)

Your pictures are lovely.

Edited by MidgePhoto

As has been said reply with a no. Aside from that how do you know it's on their OF or Patreon?

Personally, I’m fine with it. I paid for a service (a model’s time and ability), so whatever the model does with the photos has no effect on the amount of money I was happy to pay for that service.

Like a lot of these sorts of situations though, it often comes down to clear communication before the shoot - so both parties are happy with the arrangements.

If you’re not comfortable with the request, just decline. Respectfully of course. 🙂 It may seem presumptuous and entitled after a paid shoot, but more often that not - it’s more ignorance/naivety than malice in these circumstances. Try not to let it get to you too much.

Future prevention - some simple (but clear) T’s & C’s before every shoot you do. Just something you could easily copy and paste. I find good communications usually eradicate most misunderstandings. 🙂 You can further reduce the risk of it happening again by booking respective models who are more likely to be professionally clued up about such etiquette. Most reputable models who value their professional relationship with photographers wouldn’t dream of asking and (despite the fact that such platforms generally prefer self-shot content) would only upload any photographer’s work if the copyright holder reached out and made that allowance off their own back. Your average professional model wouldn’t even ask.

Caitlyn. even though UK law is quite clear about copyright owners having free reign, most of these paywall sites are in fact American (or European). And the rules in the States for any kind of commercial *adult content* are VERY strict about the performers/models featured to have properly consented to have their image used in such a way. In fact it’s only really the UK law that says otherwise… It’s quite the norm in most other countries to have clear and concise model releases (which are a benefit for both parties tbh). The UK really does seem to be the exception of not making a habit of releases, or where the existence of a basic release form doesn’t really mean much. But sites that are owned outside of the UK will not be operating by UK law… If ever I’ve worked for production companies, they have release forms that are like bloody war and peace. 😂 Because the subsequent sites that host the selling of the content are so strict. And it makes sense to be honest… They don’t want any involvement with potential exploitation or compromised consent… They are trying to run a legitimate business. 💁🏻‍♀️ Any such noise made by a performer/model who has not properly consented to their image being used in this way would probably result in a take-down without the presence of a consent form stating otherwise. It’s worth a try if you haven’t agreed to this usage. 🙂

Lenswonder said

As has been said reply with a no. Aside from that how do you know it's on their OF or Patreon?

ROFL but you have a good point.

Tabitha Boydell said

Say no?

First answer and TBH we could close the thread there. 

People can ask for things any of us might consider to be stupid and/or piss-taking.   Some people accept terms which we wouldn't.   Have a laugh at how crazy some of those are and move on. 

Caitlyn. said

Genuine question regarding the other way around - it’s come to my attention that a plethora of my art nude work has ended up on similar sites without my consent. What do i do other than send strongly worded messages?

Unless the photographer has entered into an agreement with you that says otherwise,  allowing the picture(s) to be taken is - in effect - consenting to the copyright owner making and distributing copies (for money or not) and exhibiting the pictures (for money or not) as they see fit. Only if the pictures are used in a way that misrepresents you do you have any legal basis to stop them being used. 

Caitlyn. said

tandi i’m sorry to be blunt but if i didn’t sign a model release that explicitly states my images would be put for profit on such a site, then my nude images shouldn’t be sold in a pornographic way.

Generally nice people don't take pictures of other nice people and then use them in a way that they subject(s) don't like.  That's kind of axiomatic for most definitions of "nice" BUT (unlike the US) British law doesn't have any concept of a model release and doesn't give any rights over a picture to someone who appears in it.
People should behave well, but it's not a legal requirement.
You can choose to only work with people who agree limits to what they can do with the pictures, but if they break the agreement there's not much you can do, so you should allow for any picture you appear in appearing where you least want it to, and limit what you appear in accordingly. 

Edited by CalmNudes

It would be nice if all photographers used a release contract so the model and photographer knew exactly what the levels are and exactly how the images will be used, stating pay per view, stock, prints, portfolio etc etc. anything outside of the contract would need a signed addendum and potentially negotiated compensation.

Also the model who is probably not agency represented needs to request that her or his own clauses added to this contract, covering uses not agreed, any levels exceeded which needs immediate deletion, any veto rights the model wants regarding poor quality imagery, a requirement to be treated professionally and respectfully, and the usual breach of this contract stuff.

That would ensure that everyone knows exactly what they are getting without any confusion, but I doubt anyone will do it?

Thelema said

I know some models provide forms for their photographers to sign, I think @Cheryl Elizabeth does

An overseas model sent me one a couple of weeks ago, it was the most restrictive ridiculous document I have ever seen

I wouldn't recommend any photographer sign a model release not because I'm interested in profiting from the images I take, I have zero interest but because with all the leak sites and fap sites it's highly likely images will be harvested by picture collectors and I'm not taking on the legal responsibility to get those removed or be threatened with a damages claim. Making an effort as copyright holder if required sure happy to help but taking on the legal responsibility no sir.

As always with the internet if there are places you don't want content to be seen don't shoot it.

Ask for it to be a TF shoot instead?