[Kevin R]

I was joking about Kevin signing the Model release, but their is truth in my jest, a photographer must obtain a signed consent form from the main person in a photograph to enable them to sell,trade with or use it in advertising.

Thanks Glyn - thats good to know. So if  Mr H is giving the image to someone he knows will use for their trade is in effect in the "wrong" as I have not signed a release?

[Mr H]

The picture was not "modeled" nor was it commissioned and under UK law that means the photographer owns ALL the rights and so NO release form is needed......
(See section 11 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880048_en_2#pt1-ch1-pb3-l1g9
)

That means that even the person in a photo can't give permission for a picture of themselves to be used unless they have permission from the actual photographer.

There is a possability, all though unlikely, for a breach of data protection if the person is easily recognisable in the photograph, but as you are not easily recognisable and the pic is already used on a couple of sites then that would probably not be accepted.

Just think of yourself as being  "paparatzied" for the front page of a mag Kev...

Same principle just not a mag.......

The pic isn't in use with my permission on any sites that I know of apart from yourself and 1 other and NO-ONE has MY permission to reproduce or use that picture in print or in any other form other than on their website so its currently not used in ANY advertising, rather it is used only on the websites to show how something is used or how it works..

So if anyone knows of anyone doing this then please let me know as they are in breach of copyright and I will donate the fees they owe me to a charity.

posted by lovewindows.....
that doesn't sound right, thats like me taking a picture of a picture on the internet and using it on a website ! isn't it ?

That is perfectly legal. Any copyright work (not just works of artistic craftsmanship) for the purposes of criticism and review will not infringe copyright in the work provided the work has been made available to the public and sufficient acknowledgement is made (i.e. identifying the author/creator of the work)
http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr.php/2004/11/19/uk_photographers_rights_guide#c5642

If he want's to give pictures away why does he not give pictures of himself using his vac away?

Because I usually work alone and its a bit tricky to be behind a camera and in front of it at the same time. The pictures of me on my website were taken by a professional photographer and as such he owns the copyright on them and I only have permission for them to be used for my own website and business use. I can not give or sell the rights to those pictures.



I have taken note of your views on the photo Kev and deleted the pic completely from the forum as a gesture of friendship.


Regards
Mr H

[matt]

Please get your facts right Kev....
That pic does NOT belong to Prism Professional.

Regards
Mr H

Richard - Its a picture of me working on job. You took the picture of me - so the image belongs to you but you still need my permission to distribute or use it. Just as I asked you If I could borrow one of yours recently.

as it happens, i have a insight to this, as a guy i know who owned a VW campervan had the pic taken of his van at a VW show and it was used on a Major high street billboard ad campain

he went to see a solicitor and was told that the person who took the pic has all the rights, he had none, nothing he could do about it

The difference is I am a person with rights - I am not an object like a camper van 

Mr H took the picture of me doing some work. I was sub-contracting for him at the time.  He owns the picture. Its was taken for personal use by himself. If he want's to give pictures away why does he not give pictures of himself using his vac away? Probably for the same reason I don't want mine used? We discussed posting the images on my forum - We did not discuss distributing them to all who asked. He knows how I would have felt about this.

Mr H is a friend and I have respect for him, I am sure he will be happy to respect my views on this matter.

Thank you Richard for editing the original images, its much appreciated.

we had this discussion for weeks on a VW forum ( where we have a few law types, hey even hippy van drivers can be in law ), the law is the same, unless as its been said, it was commissioned

i am sure kate moss didnt really want her pic being used when she was smoking a crack pipe, it was used, on the front page of most newspapers

[Kevin R]

I have taken note of your views on the photo Kev and deleted the pic completely from the forum as a gesture of friendship.


Regards
Mr H

Following our telephone conversation of earlier today I would like to thank Richard for his understanding regarding the photo and permissions. Legal or otherwise we have reached a gentleman's agreement, and we remain good friends