Re: Photography and the Law

"Les Invalides" <Les@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:MgNkeQAO2BJIFwBE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Chris H <chris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> posted
>>
>>AFAIK "News" reporting, in as much as a celebrity's movements are news,
is 
>>not the same as "commercial use"
>>
>>If you used a street scene with people in for an advert you would need 
>>model releases.
>
> Not true.
>
>>The same photo for a newspaper illustrating a  news item would not.
>
> True.
>
> -- 
> Les Invalides

"If you used a street scene with people in for an advert you would need 
model releases."
If those people are recognizable, and can prove that the use of the photo
is 
an embarrassment. For example, if the advertisement were for condoms, and 
the headline said that 1 out of ever ten of the people in this picture (a 
_public_ street scene) has a sexually transmittable disease, then the 
recognizable people in that picture could sue and maybe win damages.
In the USA legal system it usually comes down to money. Years ago, I was
in 
a situation and consulted with a lawyer. His comment was "Prove how you
were 
injured and how much money that injury cost you" I couldn't prove a 
worthwhile monetary injury, so the case went nowhere.