# The legalities of selling digital photos on a personal site?



## mrbabble (Jun 17, 2012)

I have a personal website where I have my favourite photos uploaded, mostly of various landmarks, music gigs. 

I was thinking of offering the option to download the original resolution of the photo for a small fee.

Where do I stand legally with this? It seems to change depending on what the landmark is, and regarding musicians, I'm assuming I would need a model release.

If it's a legal grey area. Is there a way I can avoid this by giving the original digital file to anyone who requests it, for a small transaction fee? And  make it clear they should only have it for personal use?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 17, 2012)

it's your picture, sell it.


----------



## orljustin (Jun 17, 2012)

Lots of people think they're going to sell digital downloads ( for personal use ) of their random images and find there's not much interest.  So go nuts and see what happens.


----------



## KmH (Jun 17, 2012)

Uh, what part of planet Earth are you on because laws vary accordingly? Your profile does not indicate your location.

What follows is based on the assumption you are in the USA.  There is no reliable substitute for consulting with an atorney qualified in intellectual property law. In other words, take *all* legal advice you read in an online photography forum with a larger grain of salt.

If you offer the photos for sale, it's no longer a 'personal' web site.

Consequently, it is possible, but not certain, that images containing people or property may need to be released.

How a photo is used determines what, if any, releases it needs.

Commercial use of a photo having people in it genereally requires a release from recognisable people in a photo. In the case of muscians 'right of publicity' could also be a factor. Each state in the US has it's own somewhat different requirements. States that have a large entertainment industry, like California and New York, have better defined release statutes.

Commercial use is by legal definition, not by 'street' definition, to the point that selling downloads or prints to people for personal use is genereally considered an editorial use, rather than a commercial use. However, if sales volume is high enough even selling to people for personal use becomes a commercial use.

Which points up the fact that release law is not as cut and dried as other areas of law, like traffic laws.

Even consulting with a qualified attorney doesn't guarantee you would have no legal issues. It turns out the issue of the recognisability of people is also not very cut and dried, since even taking a photo of the back of someone's head, or only a part of them could be sufficient for recognisability.

Note that property has no rights. There is very little case law pertaining to disputes of property usage in photographs, commercial or otherwise. While buildings can be copyrighted, copyright does not preclude taking photographs of those buildings.

If you would like to explore the ins-and-outs of release law more, I highly recommend the inexpensive book - A Digital Photographer's Guide to Model Releases: Making the Best Business Decisions with Your Photos of People, Places and Things


----------



## mrbabble (Jun 17, 2012)

Thanks for the replies. That book looks like just the ticket, especially when it says:

"I took a lot of pictures as a hobby, and now I want to sell them. Do I need releases for all my people pictures?".

I have a few photo galleries online and I get enquiries about people wanting to have the originals to print canvases out of them etc.


----------



## morganza (Jun 19, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> it's your picture, sell it.



As simple as that.


----------



## KmH (Jun 19, 2012)

morganza said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > it's your picture, sell it.
> ...


We wish.

Did you see Sarah Palins daughter is getting sued for using someones likeness on her reality television show and in the shows advertising?

They video taped someone, but didn't get a release signed. Oops!

They were probably OK until they decided to include shots of the person in their promotional stuff.


----------



## davisphotos (Jun 19, 2012)

Another thing to consider-if you have your camera gear currently covered under a homeowner's policy, your company would likely deny a claim if they found you were selling photos on your website. Even if you weren't making much or any money from it, they would probably say you were running a business. And then there is the whole issue of model releases, property releases and the various laws and taxes of where you happen to live.


----------

