[cc-licenses] license options for models
jonathon
jblake at eskimo.com
Thu Apr 12 13:00:51 EDT 2007
drew Roberts wrote:
> So, just as a for instance, let's say you see a BY photo with a person in it.
> Should you feel safe to use it per the BY license, or do you need to see the
> model release forms as well to feel safe?
For a movie, or video, I'd insist upon a model release form.
If I was using a CC licenced photograph instead of a stock photograph,
in only a few instances would I insist upon a model release:
* For an advertisement;
* Where it appears as if the person endorsed a product, or position;
* If the subject matter of the work was "controversial". [Whilst
"controversial" is a vague term, one useful function of Wikipedia is to
show where/what people can dispute/find controversial. If there has been
an edit war on wikipedia, somebody thinks it is controversial.]
> If your answer is you shoud feel safe, should the CC licenses have some
> distinction between advertising and endorsement
To be perfectly safe, a model release should be obtained inall
instances. The main reason I insist on one in all cases described
above, is because they are the most likely to result in a lawsuit.
> If you answer is you need to see the release forms, should the license have
> some warning language as to other rights that can block you / get you in
No.
a) Adding warning statements about other rights will confuse everybody.
b) It is not the function of CC licences toprovide a crash course in
Intellectual Property Rights law.
>> There are five major types of property:
>> * Public Property;
>> * Public Access Property;
>> * Private Access Property;
>> * Private Property;
>> * Restricted Access Property;
> Well, if I remember properly, I have read that if you shoot from public
> property, you don't need release forms for at least as far down as Private
a) This depends upon the country one is in.
Personally, I prefer to err on the side of caution.
b) It isn't always obvious what type of property one is looking at.
[I remember one beach that was "restricted access" that had nothing more
than a rusty barbed wire fence with a handwritten note saying "keep out,
no trespassing" in the local language. Along both the _Appalachian
Trail_ and _Pacific Crest Trail_ in the US are hundreds of signs that
say "no trespassing" which are either "private access property", or (in
very rare instances), "public access property".]
xan
jonathon
More information about the cc-licenses
mailing list