Author Topic: Their model release (Read 8752 times)

LanaLanglois · « **on:** November 24, 2006, 07:49 »

Good day:

I do have a question about the release available on 123rf website. The way I understand it, with this release form it seem that they have less respect for our models than other stock sites. Would someone kindly let me know about their opinion about 123rf model release form. Maybe I get it wrong?

"... either intentionally or otherwise and subject me to scandal, scorn, ridicule, reproach or indignity. ..."

Thank you in advance!

leaf · « **Reply #1 on:** November 24, 2006, 09:45 »

that is a standard line from a standard release. Nothing they have added to be mean. HOWEVER some people, or sites, think that that line sounds a little harsh, and so they have left it out.

The release I use (the one from istock) doesn't go that far and doesn't scare the potential models. I use the istock release for all the sites.

LanaLanglois · « **Reply #2 on:** November 24, 2006, 10:41 »

Oh! Than maybe there is alot I didn't catch correctly.

As English is not my first language, I maybe get it wrong, but for me, 123rf release says that the model accept to be subject to scandal and that they allowed 123rf customers to attempt to their dignity... right? The way you understand it, is it really what the text release mean?

For me, others releases does not mean exactly that. And as exemple that others do not exactly request the same from models, have a look at Shutterstock legal text for customers, it seems to me that they try their best to protect models against that:

Shutterstock legal text: "PART II / RESTRICTIONS /YOU MAY NOT : ... Use an Image in a way that places any person in the photo in a bad light or depicts them in a way that they may find offensive - this includes, but is not limited to: a) the use of Images in pornography; b) tobacco ads; c) ads for adult entertainment clubs or similar venues, or for escort, dating or similar services; d) political endorsements; e) advertisements for pharmaceutical products, including, but not limited to personal hygiene or birth control products; and f) uses that are defamatory, or contain otherwise unlawful, offensive or immoral content."

I guess I have to get back to all those legal texts from all stock I'm in... I start having an headache now... lol

berryspun · « **Reply #3 on:** November 24, 2006, 11:27 »

Bonjour Lana!
You can feel free to prepare your own model release, and if the terms are standard, you can use it for all the stock sites. If your MR is not limited to one model session, a few sites have the option to store it in the event more pictures of this model are uploaded, very handy. Don't forget that some sites, like SS, changed their policy a few months ago and now require 3 different signatures: model, photographer and witness.

CJPhoto · « **Reply #4 on:** November 24, 2006, 11:49 »

Quote from: LanaLanglois on November 24, 2006, 10:41

As English is not my first language, I maybe get it wrong, but for me, 123rf release says that the model accept to be subject to scandal and that they allowed 123rf customers to attempt to their dignity... right?

You have it back to front (I hope). What the MR says is that the photo can NOT be use in a sitation that will ... scandal, dignity ....

What SS does is give examples that make create scandal or affect someones dignity ans says that those are unacceptable uses.

leaf · « **Reply #5 on:** November 24, 2006, 12:02 »

not totally sure here, but i think that lanalogolis is correct.

the release holds the photographer free from liability even if the photo is used in a way that puts the model in the a situation that is scandalous, indignat...

i have seen that release before.

Bateleur · « **Reply #6 on:** November 24, 2006, 12:18 »

That model release is going a bit over the top, I think. I certainly wouldn't use it.

I've already had people refuse to sign the standard iStock one, which is the one I use for most situations, because they felt it was too open. I'm sure if I used that one, which spells things out in no uncertain terms, I'd get a whole lot more refusals.

In fact, thinking about it ... if someone took a photo of me, and presented me with that MR, I'd probably refuse to sign it, too. That phrase they use is scaring.

LanaLanglois · « **Reply #7 on:** November 25, 2006, 08:18 »

Thank you very much to all of you.

Finally I took decision to do not send any people photo's on that site as long as the situation will still the same. Their legal text (the one for their customers) do not have any rules about it, so their customers can do anything they want with those photos no matter which release we send. And for me, their release only reflect their position about that. Our models are not protected at all.

Well, they have wrote their rules, and the decision to go with it or not is ours...
-
About using only the istock releases: For my part, I decide to ask my models to sign four releases because the SS release require the ID card on the release so the model understand better why I ask for it; Istock because they require their own; Dreamstime because they have it in French !!!!! and the last one is a general one. - I send it in advance to my models so they have all the time they need to read and/or find someone to translate / explain them what that mean exactly. And they have time to go visit all those sites and decide if they agree to have their face there! :-)

Thank you again to all of you. I am very happy about my decision to join this forum!!

LanaLanglois · « **Reply #8 on:** November 25, 2006, 08:43 »

Quote from: leaf on November 24, 2006, 09:45

that is a standard line from a standard release. Nothing they have added to be mean. HOWEVER some people, or sites, think that that line sounds a little harsh, and so they have left it out.

The release I use (the one from istock) doesn't go that far and doesn't scare the potential models. I use the istock release for all the sites.

CJphoto, I'm not sure, but I think that I have confused you because of the SS text I have inserted... the SS text DO protect our models...

And I believe 123rf do NOT protect our models. And when submitting, we declared that we agree with 123rf rules, and sending another model release (like istock) would probably not change anything for 123rf, because when sending photos there you have agreed with their terms and conditions and you have the obligation to provide the proper release to reach for their own rules!!

Here is the terms of use for 123rf: http://www.123rf.com/terms.php
And the release is available on the side menu when login as photographer on the site.

berryspun · « **Reply #9 on:** November 25, 2006, 10:02 »

Quote from: LanaLanglois on November 25, 2006, 08:18

About using only the istock releases: For my part, I decide to ask my models to sign four releases because the SS release require the ID card on the release so the model understand better why I ask for it; Istock because they require their own; Dreamstime because they have it in French !!!!! and the last one is a general one. - I send it in advance to my models so they have all the time they need to read and/or find someone to translate / explain them what that mean exactly. And they have time to go visit all those sites and decide if they agree to have their face there! :-)

Again, if you create your own model release, you can use it for every site, by integrating what is needed, and take out or change what bothers you. DT will accept the English version, they have 9 MR available in their online resources. IS don't require their own, they accept my own without any problem. Also, I wouldn't bother to ask the models to agree for the sites you are uploading. What if you want to add a new site? You should do what you please in the limits of the contract once you have the MR. Make it more simple for your models, and for you.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Their model release (Read 8752 times)

LanaLanglois

leaf

LanaLanglois

berryspun

CJPhoto

leaf

Bateleur

LanaLanglois

LanaLanglois

berryspun

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors