THE INTERNET AS A DOUBLE EDGED SWORD
Protect yourself while getting the most out of the promotional opportunities
By Matthew B. Harrison, esq.
PhotosAndTheLaw.com
How many of you have your own website that showcases your photography? How many of you use other websites – such as myspace, deviantart, webshots, flickr, etc – to display your work? The Internet can be an amazingly inexpensive way for you, as a photographer, to 1) be able to showcase your work and 2) hopefully bring in potential business through these self-promotional efforts. However, before you run out and get yourself a website to showcase your images, I would like you to think about protecting yourself and your property, so that you do not end up falling into the group that answers affirmatively to the next question.
Of those who do display their work online – how many of you have had the pleasant experience of surfing the web and seeing your image somewhere without your permission? Unfortunately, it happens more than any of us would like to admit and you need to be aware of this phenomenon so that you can adequately protect yourself.
Copyright: How much is too much – in terms of avoiding liability.
by Matthew B. Harrison, Esq.
PhotosAndTheLaw.com
In my legal practice, I focus on the unique legal issues facing photographers and artists. Lesley Arak of FNS Studios in Springfield asked me recently an interesting copyright related question that I felt would provide interesting fodder for an article. The question was “If I wanted to recreate a famous photograph, and I hired a model, a stylist, acquired the right outfit, and created an image that looked a lot like the original – would I be in violation of the original photographer’s copyright?”
In thinking about the answer, even more questions arose in my mind. Would it make any difference if the original image were not a photograph at all – but perhaps a drawing or painting? What if the original photograph was not of a person – but rather was of a location or an object – would it matter if a photographer took a similar picture of the same subject matter?
THE LEGALITY OF URBAN EXPLORATION PHOTOGRAPHY
The difference between legal, unpublishable, and jail time
By Matthew B. Harrison, esq.
PhotosAndTheLaw.com
I recently gave a presentation at the Hallmark Institute of Photography on various legal topics that were of interest to the photography students there. Prior to the presentation, I had posted to some of the student message boards asking some of their legal concerns so that I could address them in my talk. One of the most asked about topics surrounded the legality of photography while urban exploring, or more simply: can I use the images that I took while breaking into that abandoned building? Seems that even though they are training to be professional photographers (who primarily shoot in studios) – some of them have become adventurous and are curious about potential liability. I figured that there may be more than just the students of Hallmark interested in such a topic – so I am devoting this column to just that.
What is the deal with model release forms?
When are they needed and why?
By Matthew B. Harrison, esq.
PhotosAndTheLaw.com
Essential to our culture is this underlying protection of an individual’s right to privacy; both in terms of governmental interference in personal affairs, but also freedom from invasion of privacy by other individuals. There is a lot of law on the subject and through all the confusion and conflicting precedents; four fairly clear categories of privacy protection have emerged.
· Appropriation: Individuals have a right to protection against the unauthorized use of their name or likeness for commercial purposes
· Intrusion: Individuals have a right to protection against unwarranted intrusion upon their solitude and private affairs
· False Light: Individuals have a right to protection against publicity that places them in a false light
· Public Disclosure: Individuals have a right to protection against the public disclosure of embarrassing facts about their private lives.
Empirically, these protections mean that one cannot photograph something that a person has a reasonable expectation of keeping private, even when the person is in a public area.
While courts have generally sanctioned the photography of news worthy events that are exposed to public view, they have traditionally considered certain subject matter to be private affairs that warrant protection from intrusion. People in their homes, or private areas of their business are a prime example.
Protecting your intellectual property
A look at the Trademark
By Matthew B. Harrison, esq.
PhotosAndTheLaw.com
As an arts and entertainment attorney, I find myself counseling clients with an ongoing mantra consisting of “protect your intellectual property.” Intellectual property (IP) refers to a legal entitlement that sometimes attaches to the expressed form of an idea, or to some other intangible subject matter. The term IP reflects the idea that the subject matter being protected is the product of the mind or the intellect, and that IP rights may be protected at law in the same way as any other form of property (even though the property may be intangible).
In the case of an artist, intellectual property may be all that they really have in terms of assets. An artists name as a manner in which their clients may identify their work, and the copyright protection that exist in the work, are two types of IP that immediately come to mind.
