At 11:54 AM 4/18/2005, Chris Barker wrote:
> > You may need a quick clarification from a
> > specialist lawyer (not too expensive) or at least check the net - I
> > used to be on the Photoforum list and the pro photogs there discussed
> > it endlessly. There should be guidance out there, probably on the
> > conservative side.
That's what I was thinking . . . advice from a real attorney versed in it .
. . which should be relatively low cost. It's also what I've encountered
from lists and fora similar to "Photoforum" . . . seemingly endless threads
. . . loaded with all manner of "imagination run wild" conceivable (and
hypothetical) situations. Had to sift through a mound to create my own
view of it all and I am admittedly conservative with composition to avoid
"gray" areas.
I had to indemnify the a university and the company that made a mondo
poster for them in writing for the photograph they used. Had to do the
same with a McGraw-Hill textbook subsidiary for a photo they wanted to use
in a middle school text. Since there was nobody even remotely recognizable
in either and both were on public property (state owned and open to the
public) I had zero concern. Photographer indemnification of the user of
his (or her) stock work, within the bounds of the usage agreement, seems
routine. It puts the burden of ensuring whatever releases are necessary
for people, private property, trademarks, copyrights, etc. on the
photographer and helps protects the photo user from becoming a potentially
lucrative "deep pocket" target.
-- John Lind
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|