Comments on: Can I Use a Creative Commons Photo Without a Model Release?

By: John

John — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:56:33 +0000

Always keep in mind that a verbal agreement is only worth the paper it's written on...

In otherwords: if you want to be sure... GET IT IN WRITING!!! It's the ONLY way you can prove what was agreed upon. All else is folly of the highest kind; especially in our increasingly litiginous world. Just ask Michael Jackson... oh, wait, you can't, he's dead now...

By: Carol

Carol — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:10:24 +0000

We have to make a distinction here between copyright - which is addressed by the CC licenses - from personal image rights (I will not enter here on the debate of privacy rights)...

So, while CC guarantees that you can use the photo under the terms of the license, it is true that you may have some risk related to the person who is portrait.

However, these are different rights, in terms of its contents and also in regard to its owners.

While the person that authorized a friend to take her picture and post it in Flicker .... this person did not authorized a magazine to post her picture in a editorial or fashion set of pictures...Thus a clear consent is needed.

So, we should not mix them.

By: Will Seberger

Will Seberger — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 21:37:41 +0000

Also, it comes down to knowing the source of the photograph.

It's happened more than once that my work has been taken by someone else and claimed as their own, and re-sold or re-used by a third party.

Creative Commons is fairly legally untested, to be sure, but it's even more important to know where your art is coming from.

Knowing a photo came from SoccrMom001 at Flickr does not inspire confidence in me at all.

Also, whether you're giving away the book or selling it (for loss or profit) I would definitely argue that it is non-editorial commercial use.