As some of you already know, I’m a lawyer. In
addition to managing Bria Myles for a while, I have
extensive experience with contracts and litigation
and ran a calendar publishing business when I
graduated from
UCLA Law School. That
calendar featured models and actresses like
Melissa De Sousa,
Traci Bingham,
Jossie Harris,
Mari Morrow, and
Amy Hunter, among others. It
was featured on
Entertainment Tonight,
The Jenny Jones Show, Tavis
Smiley’s show, and was written about in the
Los Angeles Times. In
short, I’ve been around the modeling business for
a while and encountered most of the situations
today’s models have dealt with.
I welcome emails from aspiring models about the
business on any and every topic. Each week, I’ll take
on one of those questions and publish it here, in the
“Model Advice” section.
The first of these entries is devoted to a subject
that is often misunderstood: the dreaded model
release and what your rights are after a photo shoot
with or without one.
THE MODEL RELEASE – From the Model’s
Perspective
What It Is; What Happens in the Absence of
One
A
model release is a document
signed by the model that allows the photographer
to use your pictures for commercial purposes.
One of the biggest misconceptions about a model
release is that it primarily benefits the model,
but as the name implies, it is the model who is
releasing rights. And generally the right being
released is to have one's image or likeness
commercially exploited. By the way, a commercial
exploitation is anything concerning the use of
your image in advertisements, promotional
materials or product packaging, as well as the
sale of products. Essentially, anytime your
image is used to make money, it is a commercial
use.
It's also important to understand that
a
photographer does not need a model release to display
your photo to the public for
noncommercial purposes, because he owns the
copyright to any picture he
takes of you. (Subject to the model's right of
privacy. In California, the aforesaid is pretty
much true, but in New York, where a written
release is necessary to display anyone's photo
for just about any reason, the photographer
would still need the release.)
Photographer Owns the Copyright
Consider a common scenario: You ask a photographer
friend to take some pictures of you. He photographs
you in a swimsuit at the beach, but no release is
signed and although he gives you a few image files,
he keeps the CD. A few years later you hit it big and
start to wonder what happened to those pictures you
took way back when. Could they have made their way
onto the internet? Been sold on eBay? Displayed in a
newspaper or magazine?
Here's the deal: As the author of those images, your
photographer friend is the holder of the copyright to
them, which means he has the right to distribute them
to the public, create derivative works from them,
publish them for any newsworthy purpose, etc. It also
means he can post them on the internet or anywhere
else we wants, so long as it is not associated with a
commercial use. (Which means he cannot sell your
images on eBay, by the way, because that is a
commercial use.)
If you want to prevent this, you have to enter into
a contract with the photographer
that provides that neither of you will display the
images to the public without the other's consent.
What to Look For in Urban Magazine Model
Releases
For magazines like
BlackMen,
KING, and
Smooth a model release will
almost always be required. You probably won't
have the opportunity to contest any of the
provisions of the release at the photo sessions
without causing a fuss. The releases are often
presented at the conclusion of the photo shoot
and the model will feel pressured to just sign
it and move on. It's pretty tough to tell an
editor that just showered you with compliments
and a great photo session that you won't sign
the release because you don't like how it's
worded.
For that reason, if possible, try to get a copy of
the release you'll be asked to sign well in advance
of the day you shoot. This way you can review it and
raise any issues before your photo shoot.
The main "gotchas" that come up in these releases are
exclusivity provisions and
releases for video footage in
addition to the still photos. An exclusivity
provision will state that after you shoot with the
magazine you are prohibited from shooting with any
similar magazines for a certain period of time,
sometimes up to a year. Generally, these are bad
news. Urban models have a very short shelf life and
even a 90-day exclusivity period can significantly
chill a model's career. A year could kill it.
Further, exclusivity provisions usually require
additional consideration (money) to be enforceable
under the law, and most magazine editors will not pay
you extra to forego other opportunities.
As for the video footage releases, this language that
is often packed into the release and overlooked by
models. Let's say Smooth Magazine shoots you and
while the still photography is taking place, you are
also being video taped. Technically, you should get
paid extra for the video footage if it is going to
used for a commercial purpose, such as to sell a
behind-the-scenes type DVD. But some of the editors
will try to slip this in with the photo session
release, so the amount you are paid for the use of
your still images in the magazine also extinguishes
your right to ask for any further money once a video
comes out. Again, not at all favorable to the model.
Okay, that's a basic overview. Post any questions you
have in comments, and I'll try to answer them.
Tags:Model Release