# Do I need permission from people in the photo before uploading to flickr?



## investmenttechnology (Aug 17, 2011)

Say if I take a group photo at a party or something, the copyright of this photo belongs to me, however do I have consent from the each person before I can upload the photo to public photo sharing site such as flickr? Or I can do whatever with the photo because I took them.


----------



## brandibell (Aug 17, 2011)

You need permission


----------



## investmenttechnology (Aug 17, 2011)

so if I don't have one's permission I must block his or her face out like they do on TV?


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 17, 2011)

> You need permission


I doubt it.

Things will vary from place to place, country to country etc....but for the most part, I think the laws are fairly similar.

There is something called 'fair use'.  It basically means that you can take photos and use them for a editorial or personal use.  For example, a photographer can take photos of anyone and have them published in newspapers/magazines/websites etc. without permission of the people in the photo.

But 'fair use' does not come into play when the image is used for commercial purposes.  This would be something like a mass produced ad campaign or product.  So you could take a photo of someone, without their permission, then sell that photo as art.  But if you put that image onto a lunch box and sell 10,000 of them...then you'd need permission.

There is also the issue of whether the photos were taken legally.  If you invaded someone's 'reasonable right to privacy' or were trespassing etc., then it may affect the case.

Another factor may be how the images affect the people in them.  For example, if the publishing of the photos defames the person in it...they may have a libel case.


----------



## brandibell (Aug 17, 2011)

When you say party is it a private party or public venue? I think if it's a public venue it maybe different but in private I believe you need a model release.


----------



## investmenttechnology (Aug 17, 2011)

private parties and social gatherings.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Aug 17, 2011)

brandibell said:


> When you say party is it a private party or public venue? I think if it's a public venue it maybe different but in private I believe you need a model release.



How do the magazines can get a way with posting drunk celebs photos?


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 17, 2011)

As far as I know...for private venues/parties....the photos/images can still fall into fair use....but the photographer may be subject to other legal action (charged with trespassing or invasion of privacy.)


----------



## brandibell (Aug 17, 2011)

Big Mike said:
			
		

> As far as I know...for private venues/parties....the photos/images can still fall into fair use....but the photographer may be subject to other legal action (charged with trespassing or invasion of privacy.)



I had no idea I thought you always needed a release. Thanks for the info it's good to know! 

Sorry for the wrong advice!


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 17, 2011)

I'm not a lawyer...just a guy on the internet ....so take my advice as such.  The best advice would be to consult an actual lawyer (in your area).

As a point of reference, think about celebrities.  They are constantly having their photos taken and the pictures are published in magazines, tabloids, newspapers etc.  They certainly aren't giving written permission for all of that.  They do occasionally sue the publishers, but I think it's rare and even rarer for them to win the case.

Also consider a news reporter/photographer.  They take all sorts of photos of all sorts of places and don't get permission to publish them.  

Then consider Facebook, Flickr etc.  Look at all the photos of people and ask yourself if you think all those people singed a release.


----------



## KmH (Aug 17, 2011)

The laws in the AU, will be different from the laws in the US.

Online is an un-reliable place to be seeking legal advice. (Please read my siggy *&#8595; &#8595; &#8595; &#8595; &#8595;* )

For those here in the USA:

Putting photos of someone on your *personal* Flickr page is not considered a commercial use, nor is it considered publication, and a release is not needed.

You can even sell those photos as art, because selling photos as art constitutes an editorial use, not a commercial use.

So self-promotion considered:



> When you put your images on the Web, in a portfolio, or in a catalog to promote yourself, or to make the photos available for sale or licensing, this self-promtion is not considered a form of commercial use that requires a release from subjects of your photos. - Dan Heller


 page 127 of A Digital Photographer's Guide to Model Releases: Making the Best Business Decisions with Your Photos of People, Places and Things

Then self-promotion considered:



> Photos used for self-promotion don't need a release as long as the people in them are not perceived to be advocates or sponsors of your business. - Dan Heller


 page 127 & 128  of the same book.

Obviously, if people in the photos are in fact perceived as advocates or sponsors of your business, you better have a valid release on file.

One last note; *Model and property release laws vary by state* here in the USA, and some states have additional 'Right of Publicity' statutes that may apply. Model/Property release law isn't as cut and dried as laws like traffic laws.


----------



## brandibell (Aug 17, 2011)

Big Mike said:
			
		

> I'm not a lawyer...just a guy on the internet ....so take my advice as such.  The best advice would be to consult an actual lawyer (in your area).
> 
> As a point of reference, think about celebrities.  They are constantly having their photos taken and the pictures are published in magazines, tabloids, newspapers etc.  They certainly aren't giving written permission for all of that.  They do occasionally sue the publishers, but I think it's rare and even rarer for them to win the case.
> 
> ...



Very true!


----------



## Forkie (Aug 17, 2011)

brandibell said:


> You need permission



No you don't.  The only time you need permission, i.e., a model release, is if you intend to use the photo for commercial purposes, such as advertising.  Just uploading it to a social networking site is fine without permission.


----------



## McNugget801 (Aug 17, 2011)

No permission needed


----------



## addicted2glass (Sep 21, 2011)

Looking at at a gallery and wondering if the photographer while in the middle of having a drink at the bar whipped out an SLR camera shot the place up and handed out release forms it doesn't seem very likely.  That brought me to this thread.

I do my best to be considerate but it is not a crime to photograph people in public places.  

I guess the gift is to be able to sort out the people that enjoy being photographed from the ones that don't.  
(That is my learning curve as a photographer)


I'll try to do more reading.


----------



## MTVision (Sep 21, 2011)

brandibell said:
			
		

> When you say party is it a private party or public venue? I think if it's a public venue it maybe different but in private I believe you need a model release.



In the US even at a private party you can take someones picture and you don't need permission to post it.


----------



## photo guy (Oct 10, 2011)

private gathering = depending on who the people are Fair use, however, model release could save you hassle if something were to arise.


----------



## picturebook (Oct 10, 2011)

general occasion   no need to ask i thing so


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Oct 24, 2011)

What if they said 'Do not post it online'? Are you still allowed to post it?


----------



## skieur (Oct 24, 2011)

Big Mike said:


> > You need permission
> 
> 
> I doubt it.
> ...



However, years ago, published nude photos of Jackie Kennedy appeared in a Photo magazine that I have in my collection.  They were taken while the photographer was trespassing on an island in the Medditerranean.

It seems therefore that trespassing is irrelevant.

skieur


----------



## enzodm (Oct 25, 2011)

investmenttechnology said:


> Say if I take a group photo at a party or something, the copyright of this photo belongs to me, however do I have consent from the each person before I can upload the photo to public photo sharing site such as flickr? Or I can do whatever with the photo because I took them.



You are from Australia and most of people responding here is from US and Canada, so I would ask on a national forum to verify with local laws. As an example, most of what is told here is not true in Italy.


----------



## enzodm (Oct 25, 2011)

skieur said:


> It seems therefore that trespassing is irrelevant.
> 
> skieur



consider that a newspaper may take the risk of legal actions if the photos are sufficiently interesting.


----------



## Raincheck (Oct 25, 2011)

As long as you are in a public area there is no need to ask for permission even for commercial usage, but just out of courtesy you do.


----------



## skieur (Oct 25, 2011)

enzodm said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> > It seems therefore that trespassing is irrelevant.
> ...



It was not a newspaper but a Photo magazine as I indicated.

skieur


----------

