Only Fans & Patreon

Ask them when booking the shoot, where the images from her are going to.  And if you don't like the reply back, then just block them, and move onto the next choice of ,model.

Rosie Loki the thing is they will ask after the shoot not before.

Some models do state on portfolio notes their wants, some will ask after a shoot putting a photographer on the spot, some photographers will be easily swayed.

Edited by Lenswonder

Lenswonder then make sure you have asked them BEFORR the shoot?

Rosie Loki I’ve experienced a situation where a model and I shot TF arranged through here, the model chose a specific image (among others) to be edited, thanked me for doing so, then was unhappy (in a big way) when I posted it on here, nowhere else. So even your very reasonable suggestion might not work

emptyw said

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

emptyw said

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 🤣

Search "Copyright designs and patents act".  The language is not as legalistic as you might expect. 

Your first post was wrong on all substantial points.  Under the act photographs are artistic works and the first owner of copyright (unless they are an employee creating in the course of their employment) is the person who created it, so a photographer can have an assistant fire the shutter. Depending on who directs the shoot the person working the camera may not be the sole owner of copyright, and any case of disputed ownership of copyright comes to court the question at issue is which person(s) created the photograph, who decided on the lighting, the camera position / angle , the clothing, the set, the pose, who decided on the camera settings etc. In many cases although we assume the photographer is "director of photography" in some cases they are "cameraman" under a model's direction and might be joint owner of the copyright, or not have any stake in the copyright at all. 

Under UK law no-one owns the rights to their likeness. If they did there would be no paparazzi photos for a start, posting images of celebs to soc-med would be impossible, etc. The law is tilted in favour of the creator;  if picture was obtained by breaking an agreement, by dishonesty or criminally, it's not usable (usually), if you use a photo to harass someone or cause them distress there are protection laws (hard for a model to argue that she is distressed by the existence of an image of herself that she was paid to pose for, or its presence on the internet even if the site its on is distasteful), and if someone is misrepresented then they can stop that and may get damages if the misrepresentation was harmful (a picture of someone who worked as a model, modelling, is not misrepresenting her).

The law makes no distinction between commercial and non-commercial use. 

UK law - and law in most European countries - doesn't allow releasing someone from the duties to you the law has placed on them, US law does. Most things about "model releases" apply in the US but not the UK, and most releases are instruments to for the model to do something the law doesn't recognise, in respect of rights she does not have.  The sole purpose of a "release" in the UK is to satisfy the legal department of a company which buys rights to the picture than a third party will not turn up and kick up a fuss at a later date (e.g. a model insists that conditions were agreed, which in fact were not; or that she was cheated or deceived into posing and the pictures wouldn't have existed at all if the photographer had been truthful). As such there is no general release, only the paper work the client  wants, which makes the vast majority of releases that photographers ask models to sign pretty much worthless (even if they are legally tosh they do show the model understood that the pictures could be used, but if they're not the clients own specific tosh they won't help a sale).

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?

Have a page on your website or google docs where you have your Ts&Cs, including the note that by accepting a shoot the photographer is agreeing that images will not be used on XXX-type websites. 

Make sure you direct all potential photographers there and have an email trail with them confirming they have read it. 

Is it air tight? Probably not (but technically agreeing to your Tc&Cs in writing could be seen as a contract). Is it better than nothing with the potential to weed a few out? Maybe. 

I ALWAYS ask before any shoot if people mind me showcasing any images OR behind the scenes for my Playboy whether it's paid or TF.

People can say yes or no and I always respect either answer.

I don't make much to be honest off the platform and if you divided my monthly income between shoot pics and my own self shot stuff it would be a very small percentage too.

But of course I always ask, I wouldn't dream of using images without permission, and to be honest I don't know any models who would

Unfortunately us models have no rights when it comes to the other way around

Edited by Holly Alexander

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?

It could have been harvested by anyone and used anywhere. It's wise to first check if it was the photographer that uploaded it before any strongly worded message. I had a lingerie image uploaded to an escort website, using her image as their "top escort". 

Allesandro B I suspect I know who it is! Great model but wow!!!

Rosie Loki not something you generally have to ask professional models, also not something I'd ask at all. It's interesting that tfp would not be brought up before by the model that's also something they can do.

Holly Alexander THIS

Lenswonder there's no harm in asking though...I don't know why you wouldn't when arranging a shoot with them?

Holly Alexander said

Unfortunately us models have no rights when it comes to the other way around

It's my understanding that models can make any prerequisites they want and have it written into the photographers release/contract, so technically models are actually in control of what they do, how they do it and where the content they help create can be used, if they actually want to make those decisions. To form a binding contract and then ask for extra afterwards as has happened in this post, can happen there's no law against it, plus if the other party wishes to allow it and negotiate a price for a license that's fine too, so in this instance the photographer has full control.

At the end of the day I think that professional and semi professional Models need to generate additional revenue streams too. Photographers can use their images as they wish unless otherwise agreed, so they have the photographs to profit from for life, often Models are paid once and retiring from modelling ends all payments. Possibly the only stream would be Royalties, a share in any revenue but to be fair to the photographer, for 1 year the photographs are royalty free to the photographer, after that year a percentage share of any revenue goes to the model. Obviously this is honour based, but the photographers I have met are honourable and trustworthy people.

Edited by tandi

AIUI, Pre-shoot comms *could* be seen as a contract if they are in writing; although in the UK verbal agreement is also OK, just harder to prove.

For example ...

When I book a model, I tell them:

Date of the shoot

Time of the shoot

Levels to be shot

Payment

Transport arrangements

Reimbursement of expenses

If I intend to use the images commercially [which I never do]

It's then up to the model to agree, disagree or propose amendments.

Once pre-comms are agreed, we have a contract. Any changes to the shoot [date, time etc] are then a variation to the contract and have to be agreed by all parties.

If either party uses the images in a manner that is outside of this agreement, it's a breech of contract and could - theoretically - be tested in court.

A release issued by a model that stipulates usage could - AFAiK - only be considered valid if it was presented prior to the shoot agreement as it potentially contains a change to the contract reached in pre-comms.

IANAL and suggest that anyone working freelance checks with a legal resource to ensure that they are operating in a way that *actually* covers them.

Edited by Stu H