Forums > Model Colloquy > Is this appropriate?
guide forum

Photographer

GPS Studio Services

Posts: 36389

San Francisco, California, US

GPS Studio Services wrote:
The photographer shoots the photos.  The model signs two releases, one for the photographer and one for the OP.  The photographer delivers the images to the OP along with a usage license. 

Tell me where this mythical contract is that the OP has to sign?  A model release is valid when given to a minor.

Infiniti Creations LLC wrote:
A model release IS a contract of sorts between you and a model as to how you the photographer plans to use the image. I give up with this thread. I'm going back to my day-job of contract management.

Where a release is a contract, (and not all releases are contracts), they are unilateral.  That means there is an obligation placed upon one party, not the other.  In this case, it is a promise by the model to not sue the holder of the release. 


Where a contract is entered into with a minor, in some cases they can rescind it.  Since there is no obligation or promise made by them, there is nothing for them to rescind.  They can't "void" the model's promise not to sue.

You are way over-thinking this.

Feb 07 13 10:13 pm Link

Photographer

RKD Photographic

Posts: 3265

Iserlohn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

Alivia Autumn wrote:
I agree let your parents handle the business, you just make the clothes.  At least until you turn 18.  I would do it (model for you) if an adult contacted me.  But certainly not a minor if not for legal reasons, for moral reasons I suppose.

What moral reasons? I'm curious - she's just a clothes designer. What moral reasons are stopping you from modelling clothes? The age of the designer has no bearing on matters.
She forms a company, her parents act as executors until she's of age, that's it as far as legality is concerned, but morally? hmm

Unless the clothes are made from Tiger-skin with ivory boning, there's no moral aspect to any of this...

Feb 08 13 01:53 am Link

Photographer

LittleWhiteRabbit Photo

Posts: 134

Columbus, Ohio, US

You could do a styled shoot for a photographer in which you act as the wardrobe stylist and trade for pictures and a link to your facebook page (if your clothing has one)...

Feb 08 13 02:01 am Link

Photographer

RKD Photographic

Posts: 3265

Iserlohn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

LittleWhiteRabbit Photo wrote:
You could do a styled shoot for a photographer in which you act as the wardrobe stylist and trade for pictures and a link to your facebook page (if your clothing has one)...

This is probably the easiest solution - let the photographer handle arranging the models and all the paperwork and just worry about the clothes.

Feb 08 13 02:08 am Link

Photographer

Art of the nude

Posts: 11892

Olivet, Michigan, US

Lovely Day Media wrote:
The only problem I see is finding a model and/or photographer who is willing to do the job.  If you are paying them, that problem is pretty much eliminated, too.

If she's giving them the lingerie in addition to pictures, and she is, presumably, just starting out, it seems like a plausible arrangement.  It's not like she's a national brand (yet!) just trying to be cheap.

Feb 08 13 03:09 am Link

Photographer

Art of the nude

Posts: 11892

Olivet, Michigan, US

GPS Studio Services wrote:
To the OP, kudos for your work and ambition.  If you have any trouble with this, at all, drop me a line.  I will get a model to pose for you and I will shoot it for free.  I'd like to support your efforts, not make it more difficult.

Same here.  Assuming the lingerie is of the sort the OP describes above, I can't see the issue.

Feb 08 13 03:12 am Link

Photographer

P O T T S

Posts: 5381

Lake City, Florida, US

S W I N S K E Y wrote:
once again, why does she need a contract?...in florida, she doesn't even need a written model release.

having been in business and doing commercial work for many years (check my credits) I have never used a contract, for anything other then a wedding (brides can be  crazy).

you people make this way more difficult then it need be...

http://rightofpublicity.com/statutes/florida

Doug is correct, while no contract is needed, consent to publish is required. That consent may technically be verbal as well. There is a lawsuit going on in the state somewhere over that mugshot magazine. The magazine never got permission from the "models" to publish their images.

Feb 08 13 03:24 am Link

Model

Shelbiee Savage

Posts: 126

Gainesville, Florida, US

Thanks guys! This gives me a lot to think about!

Feb 08 13 07:00 am Link

Digital Artist

ShuttingDown

Posts: 68

Crystal Lake, Illinois, US

Was hard to follow this thread, but let me attempt to summarize in case that will help.

First, you really should have a contract.  That ultimately protects both parties.

But in many states (or all?), it's not legal for a minor to enter into a contract by themselves.  If your state is one of those, see if your parents would represent your side of the contract (as was stated earlier in this thread).

The actual wording of the contract, money/goods involved, etc. really have no bearing on the situation.  It's all about the legality of each party entering the contract.

Note that the flip-side is also true; working with models that are minors.  There are typically differently-worded contracts that usually (always?) require a signature from a parent or legal guardian.

Feb 08 13 11:19 am Link

Model

Amber Dawn - Colorado

Posts: 6250

Castle Rock, Colorado, US

Even if she isint at the shoot she'll still see the images on her online store. I don't see it as being illegal no different then Photographers taking pictures of kids in their undies for like jc pennies mag or some sore mag. No diff then her going to VS and seeing all the chicks in their lingerie on posters. As long as she isit seeing any nudity I highly doubt its illegal.

Feb 08 13 11:08 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Damianne

Posts: 15975

Austin, Texas, US

It's lingerie. Unless you're having it modelled in a pornographic fashion, there's no reason you can't have these images.
If you can access the type of imagery you want without inputting your birthdate (like on the aerie online store), you're fine.

Feb 08 13 11:18 pm Link

Photographer

Luke Ryan Photography

Posts: 580

Santa Monica, California, US

Shelbiee Savage wrote:
I'm not sure if there are rules against this at all, so I'd figure I'd ask.

In a nutshell, I've been sewing literally since I could comprehend picking up a needle a thread, and I now have an online store. Recently, I've been designing lingerie (yes I am 16, and yes, my parents know) and since I can't model it, I was wondering if it would be inappropriate of me to ask a model in here if she'd mind modeling the pieces for my store.

Is this at all bad or wrong since I'm only 16 and the model would be 18+?

Thanks in advance!

Why cant you model it ?  There is no law in America that prohibits a 16 yr old from modeling lingerie.

Feb 08 13 11:21 pm Link

Photographer

Mask Photo

Posts: 1404

Fremont, California, US

GPS Studio Services wrote:
The photographer delivers the images to the OP along with a usage license. 

Tell me where this mythical contract is that the OP has to sign?

I have my clients sign my usage licenses. Given that a model can't sign a release without being of legal age, I'm assuming that a client can't sign a license (the back of which contains explicit terms that are agreed to) without being of legal age.

Of course, my assumptions could be wrong; do you have links to anything that accurately describes what minors can and can't legally sign?

Feb 09 13 03:59 am Link

Photographer

Brian Scanlon

Posts: 791

Encino, California, US

Mask Photo wrote:

I have my clients sign my usage licenses. Given that a model can't sign a release without being of legal age, I'm assuming that a client can't sign a license (the back of which contains explicit terms that are agreed to) without being of legal age.

Of course, my assumptions could be wrong; do you have links to anything that accurately describes what minors can and can't legally sign?

Is there a legal reason to require the licensee to sign the license?  We enter into many license agreements without a signature.  Ever buy a music CD?

Feb 09 13 07:02 pm Link

Photographer

Mask Photo

Posts: 1404

Fremont, California, US

Brian Scanlon wrote:
Is there a legal reason to require the licensee to sign the license?  We enter into many license agreements without a signature.  Ever buy a music CD?

Yeah, and a lot of people copy music CDs and claim they didn't know any better. This is a way to demonstrate that the client DID know better than to use an image in an inappropriate way, so it boosts your case if you need to get litigious.

Feb 09 13 07:19 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

GPS Studio Services

Posts: 36389

San Francisco, California, US

Brian Scanlon wrote:
Is there a legal reason to require the licensee to sign the license?  We enter into many license agreements without a signature.  Ever buy a music CD?

Mask Photo wrote:
Yeah, and a lot of people copy music CDs and claim they didn't know any better. This is a way to demonstrate that the client DID know better than to use an image in an inappropriate way, so it boosts your case if you need to get litigious.

None the less, it is not a contractual term.  The license is a grant of rights.  It is a unilateral agreement.  The signature of the licensee, perhaps, could be a ways of acknowledging the rights, , but just as with a model release, given by an adult to a minor, in your case, there is nothing for the minor to rescind. 

You are trying to create legal issues where no issues exist.

Feb 09 13 09:22 pm Link

Photographer

Art of the nude

Posts: 11892

Olivet, Michigan, US

Brian Scanlon wrote:
Is there a legal reason to require the licensee to sign the license?  We enter into many license agreements without a signature.  Ever buy a music CD?

Mask Photo wrote:
Yeah, and a lot of people copy music CDs and claim they didn't know any better. This is a way to demonstrate that the client DID know better than to use an image in an inappropriate way, so it boosts your case if you need to get litigious.

GPS Studio Services wrote:
None the less, it is not a contractual term.  The license is a grant of rights.  It is a unilateral agreement.  The signature of the licensee, perhaps, could be a ways of acknowledging the rights, , but just as with a model release, given by an adult to a minor, in your case, there is nothing for the minor to rescind. 

You are trying to create legal issues where no issues exist.

As I read it, MASK is a minor, who is GRANTING the license.  And who, therefore, has their parents sign.

Feb 09 13 09:39 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

GPS Studio Services

Posts: 36389

San Francisco, California, US

Mask Photo wrote:
Of course, my assumptions could be wrong; do you have links to anything that accurately describes what minors can and can't legally sign?

What you are asking for varies by state.

Feb 09 13 10:04 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

GPS Studio Services

Posts: 36389

San Francisco, California, US

Brian Scanlon wrote:
Is there a legal reason to require the licensee to sign the license?  We enter into many license agreements without a signature.  Ever buy a music CD?

Mask Photo wrote:
Yeah, and a lot of people copy music CDs and claim they didn't know any better. This is a way to demonstrate that the client DID know better than to use an image in an inappropriate way, so it boosts your case if you need to get litigious.

GPS Studio Services wrote:
None the less, it is not a contractual term.  The license is a grant of rights.  It is a unilateral agreement.  The signature of the licensee, perhaps, could be a ways of acknowledging the rights, , but just as with a model release, given by an adult to a minor, in your case, there is nothing for the minor to rescind. 

You are trying to create legal issues where no issues exist.

Art of the nude wrote:
As I read it, MASK is a minor, who is GRANTING the license.  And who, therefore, has their parents sign.

I didn't read it that way, but that is a totally different issue.  Go to copyright.gov and do a little bit of reading.  Minors are allowed to hold copyright.  Indeed, if a minor is the creator of a work, it is them, not their parents, that own the copyright.

People assume that parents can do whatever they want on behalf of their minor children.  That isn't at all true.  As an example, in most states, the reason that a parent can sign a model release on behalf of a child goes to employment law.  It is for that reason that in Florida, absent consideration, a parent cannot generally sign a model release on behalf of their minor child.  It is complex and varies greatly from state to state what a parent can or cannot do.

In the case of copyright, it is federal law that governs it so that there is some uniformity.  The grant of a license, isn't by itself a contract.  Federal law specifically allows a minor to own copyright, and therefore by extension, grant a license.

The problem is if a license is also, in any manner, attached to a contract, then that will fall under state law.  In that case, there may be restrictions as to what a minor can do, or at least voidability.

All of this is off topic though, since the thread is about a minor receiving a license, not granting it.

Feb 09 13 10:10 pm Link

Model

Rachel-Elise

Posts: 1650

Grand Rapids, Michigan, US

Shelbiee Savage wrote:

Oh. Oh my.

xD

It's ok, honey. I also didn't have any idea. LOL!

Feb 10 13 04:16 am Link