From Helen Sedwick:
Suppose you find the perfect image for your book cover on the internet—a plucky redhead with a perfect pout. Even better, the photo is available under a Creative Commons attribution-only license that permits commercial use. What a money saver!
But wait. Do you have a release from the plucky redhead? Do you need one?
Or you attend a writers’ conference and take photos of a famous author speaking at the podium. Later, you capture that same author when he is sloppy-faced and drunk at a large reception. Later still, you snap a photo of him punching a writing rival in the restroom. Can you post those images on Pinterest and Facebook without risking a lawsuit?
Writers should be nervous when incorporating images showing identifiable people in their blogs, books, or social media postings. Violating privacy and publicity rights is a potentially costly mistake.
But you don’t want to walk around with blank releases in your pocket. And what if the photos show hundreds of faces? Do you need releases from every recognizable person? Without releases, are you limited to posting photos of cute puppies and selfies?
Using Images with Identifiable People
The rules about using images with recognizable people come down to two considerations:
- Did the person in the photo have a reasonable expectation of privacy?
- How is the image being used?
You need to consider both. Passing one test is not enough.
Did the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy?
Generally, people do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy for anything they do in public. The exception is a performance or meeting where you are informed that taking photographs is prohibited. In those situations, you make an implied promise to honor the no-photo request as a condition to attending the performance or meeting.
If a photo was taken in a private setting, such as a home or office, you should assume you need permission before you post or publish any image showing identifiable people. Contact everyone recognizable in the photo and ask for a release. I provide a sample below.
So for the image of the redhead, look closely to see if the photo was taken in a public place? Since it is often impossible to know, I recommend against using any Creative Commons image showing recognizable faces unless it was obviously taken in a public place.
Regarding the famous author, you may assume the author had no expectation of privacy when speaking at the podium and getting drunk at the reception, since both were in public.
. . . .
Is your use commercial?
Do not use an image of a recognizable person for advertising or promotional purposes ever, even if it was taken in a public setting, is available under a Creative Commons license, or is in the public domain, unless you have written permission. Using anyone’s image for commercial purposes violates that person’s right to publicity. You could be liable for damages, including punitive damages. In some states, these rights survive for up to 75 years after a person’s death.
The line between commercial and non-commercial is fuzzy. Using an image on a book cover, t-shirts or other merchandise is commercial, but posting it on a blog or social media site that is informative and editorial is probably not. Use common sense. How would you feel if you were in the photo?
To return to our hypothetical famous author, you may post an image of the two of you shaking hands or sharing a beer, but don’t say or imply that the author gave your book glowing reviews without written consent. I would not put those images on the back of your book without consent; that’s too closely related to selling a product.
As for the plucky redhead, contact the original photographer and ask whether a release was obtained or is possible. If you use the image on your book cover without a release, it could cost you plenty.
Will your use imply any advocacy or endorsement?
Even if the use is not commercial, do not use a person’s likeness to imply that the person advocates or supports a certain political, religious, charitable or other position without a clear, written release. Again, this violates privacy and publicity rights.
. . . .
How high is the M.E. factor?
As an attorney, I am often asked, “Can someone sue me?” Unfortunately, just about anyone may sue you, even if the suit is frivolous. My rule of thumb about litigation risk is the M.E. Factor: money multiplied by emotion. If a lot of money is involved, then a lawsuit is likely even if there is little emotion involved. On the other hand, if someone is angry, offended, or threatened, then they are likely to sue regardless of a small financial stake. If you get someone peeved enough, you may awake one morning to a process server banging on your door.
Link to the rest at Helen Sedwick
PG says it’s always best to obtain the person’s permission. In writing and signed by the person.
If you’re obtaining an image from an established stock photo seller, you should be safer, but make certain that you’re obtaining the right to use the image for commercial purposes.
If you’re picking up an image online, even if the website says the image is offered under a Creative Commons License that permits commercial use (some Creative Commons licenses do not include permission for commercial use), you’re still not necessarily in the clear.
Anyone can post an image they find online and say the image is offered under a Creative Commons license. However, if the creator of the original image did not grant a Creative Commons license to the image to whomever posted it online, you’re still looking at a potential copyright violation.
The safest place to obtain stock photos for commercial use is a well-established and large stock photo vendor. Adobe is one prominent example.
Comments are closed.