Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
Boom. Found something: Back in 2009.... http://www.tmz.com/2009/02/13/farrah-fa … hat-photo/ Fawcett is suing Bio-Graphics inc., Pie International Inc. and author T.N. Trikilis, claiming that Trikilis "has falsely asserted to third parties that [Fawcett] does not own any rights in the photographs."
Fawcett says she "owns and possesses all the photographs and negatives of all the photographs taken at the photo shoot."
Fawcett claims Trikilis and Pie were telling people they owned exclusive rights to the photo. She says Trikilis and Pie have reproduced the photo and are selling it.
Farrah is suing for $100,000 minimum. ------------------------------------------ Then she dropped it. Why? http://wapellarocks.blogspot.com/2009/0 … wcett.html The blitz would later be dubbed "the Farrah Phenomenon." For her one-season run on "Charlie's Angels" Fawcett was paid $5,000 per episode — but she earned $400,000 in royalties from the poster.
In February of this year, the actress sued Bio-Graphics, Inc, Pie International Inc. and author T.N. Trikilis, who collectively claimed to own exclusive rights to the iconic photo.
In the suit, Fawcett claimed that Trikilis had “falsely asserted to third parties that [she] did not own any rights in the photographs.”
The actress claimed that she “owns and possesses all the photographs and negatives taken at the shoot.”
Fawcett initially requested $100,000 minimum, but entered into a dismissal May 11. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I would have loved to see that contract! Oh P.S. sourcing information is really shady. I've seen sold 12 million copies (even in Wiki) then sold 6 million copies. Date/year/etc., but still! --------------------------------------- http://photobusinessforum.blogspot.com/ … d-now.html Wow - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/arts/ … .html?_r=0 She first became famous when a poster of her in a red bathing suit, leonine mane flying, sold more than twice as many copies as posters of Marilyn Monroe and Betty Grable combined. No poster like it has achieved anywhere near its popularity since, and, arriving before the Internet era, in which the most widely disseminated images are now digital, it may have been the last of its kind.
Photographer
NewBoldPhoto
Posts: 5216
PORT MURRAY, New Jersey, US
Jules NYC wrote:
Then she dropped it.
Why? Terminal cancer diagnosis.
The big 'C' tends to alter ones perspective... Just say'n
Photographer
J O H N A L L A N
Posts: 12221
Los Angeles, California, US
Jules NYC wrote:
I just spoke to Attorney Gibson 5 minutes ago.
Ok... here is the deal:
Yes like most everyone agrees a release is different from a contract. Contracts are usually hashed out with agencies and the agents hired to deal with these specific usage issues.
A release quick and short is to use a model's likeness for their website/port. If any MONEY is to be made for advertising, etc. then a contractights This just goes to show one can find a lawyer who doesn't know (or kinda knows) what he's talking about. This is why one has to be careful about just "talking to a lawyer" for specific vertical advice. They often don't practice in the area one's asking about.
This is a hodgepodge mixture of nonsense, partial truth, and commercial practice for a narrow scope of engagements.
Model
Account subscribed
Posts: 175
Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
I would say; so much rubbish for such an easy thing. First, no lawyers would do a statement in an explicit case without knowing the facts in what is in front of them. Second, a release built up as a "models- AND photographers release" is built up as consent between two parties. That is a a deal, or a contract as we might say, on what we have agreed on. Valued just like a marriage between two people. If only the model sign a statement that she does to release it, it is also a valued statement just like a testament.
In respond to OP:s question. I said earlier that I signed such a contract 2 weeks ago. In swedish. So everything is possible that two parties involved agree on as far as it is not things that you can not have consent towards.
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
J O H N A L L A N wrote:
This just goes to show one can find a lawyer who doesn't know (or kinda knows) what he's talking about. This is why one has to be careful about just "talking to a lawyer" for specific vertical advice. They often don't practice in the area one's asking about.
This is a hodgepodge mixture of nonsense, partial truth, and commercial practice for a narrow scope of engagements. A contract or release could state anything it does and if two parties agree, it is what it is. I thought the lawyer was pretty knowledgeable. I'm not a lawyer, if you are, do tell.
"A release quick and short is to use a model's likeness for their website/port." This statement can be debated for sure. It could be used for more than a website/port. A release can have any verbiage it wants. I used these exact words because the lawyer was explaining that a contract details specific usage rights and a release should be for general purposes. Whatever those general purposes 'are' should of course be agreed to by both parties. In my earlier post, I should have worded that differently; I was regurgitating what I just heard. Maybe the lawyer stressed what a release 'should' be used for in his opinion.
Each and every release is different, otherwise every release would have the exact same language if no money is to be made. Contracts would be specific to the cause.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: R. Sebastian Gibson
Attorney Sebastian Gibson has over 35 years experience representing entertainment clients. His clients have included celebrities, writers, artists in music, film and television, and models from around the world. With law degrees and experience in California and Great Britain and experience obtaining a seven-figure copyright and trademark infringement settlement in a case involving a nationally known figure, Sebastian Gibson is uniquely talented to represent celebrities, models and individuals whose publicity rights or privacy rights have been violated. With offices in Orange County and the Palm Springs and Palm Desert area home to writers, the Coachella Music Festival, Palm Springs International Film Festival and Indian Wells BNP Paribas Tennis Open, Sebastian Gibson is the attorney for all things entertainment and creative.
This attorney is not a fan of releases being used as contracts. Too bad in a MM thread we can't conference call him on multiple lines and for the 5 minutes I spoke to him, I got the heavy impression that both releases & contracts should specific. Contracts are surely more specific to *many variables here*.
Is ANYONE an attorney that specifically specializes in modeling contracts here?
Was Farrah's agency full of bad legal advice? If the law was so self-explanatory and simple, why do people sue for these cases 24/7?
Why don't YOU give specific advice to the OP then on what she is looking for and send her a copy of the release she should use and a contract for her. That way she could do a side by side comparison of what the photographer drafts so she doesn't get screwed.
I've been published in magazines (and more than I show in my port) and there was no fancy contract drawn, just a release. Since I was published in the mag and they weren't selling dolls and shit of me, it was pretty simple, each and every time. I never asked for a percentage of profits for something a local photographer and I wanted to accomplish. It could be a guy that wants to make posters or a calendar and prints it in Staples for all we know.
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
NewBoldPhoto wrote:
Terminal cancer diagnosis.
The big 'C' tends to alter ones perspective... Just say'n True, true.
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
Marie Lindstrom wrote:
I would say; so much rubbish for such an easy thing. First, no layers would do a statement in an explicit case without knowing the facts in what is in front of them. Second, a release built up as a "models- AND photographers release" is built up as consent between two parties. That is a a deal, or a contract as we might say, on what we have agreed on. Valued just like a marriage between two people. If only the model sign a statement that she does to release it, it is also a valued statement just like a testament.
In respond to OP:s question. I said earlier that I signed such a contract 2 weeks ago. In swedish. So everything is possible that two parties involved agree on as far as it is not things that you can not have consent towards. The lawyer didn't claim anything specific to anything. Just made the point that if money was to be made (beyond what the model gets paid for the shoot) it really should be in a contract but can it be stated in a release? Sure.
When models do bigger projects and more money is involved, the understanding is there.
Any layperson can draft a contract; it's not hard with Rocketlawyer. Easy for unsigned models and togs that are not represented by agents alike.
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
So pretty much the OP needs a contract drafted, signed and agreed with specific language about sales & compensation.
If both parties agree, it is what it is.
In law, anything can be disputed.
Have fun.
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
Ken Marcus Studios wrote:
That is NOT what a model release is all about.
What you are talking about is a contract between the model and photographer, stating the agreement for compensation upon sale of the photos.
It's not a good idea to combine that with a model release, or with 2257 paperwork (if any is needed) This.
Model
Account subscribed
Posts: 175
Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
Jules NYC wrote:
The lawyer didn't claim anything specific to anything. Just made the point that if money was to be made.................. I have a "Diploma in laws" so I am not worried about what I say or how others understand what other lawyers say. Nor do I feel such a simple matter as this beeing anything to discuss. Told you above how I look at it and I won't change my mind no matter how many lawyers beeing contacted. I know perfectly what paper I have signed and I guess OP has gotten an answer too. That was my intention. So from my point of view; CASE IS CLOSED!
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
Marie Lindstrom wrote:
I have a "Diploma in laws" so I am not worried about what I say or how others understand what other layers say. Nor do I feel such a simple matter as this beeing anything to discuss. Told you above how I look at it and I won't change my mind no matter how many lawyers beeing contacted. I know perfectly what paper I have signed and I guess OP has gotten an answer too. That was my intention. So from my point of view; CASE IS CLOSED! Oh shit
That was hilarious
Just learn how to spell check layer.
Do you practice law?
Did you pass the bar?
Sorry I'm beeing this way.
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
Marie Lindstrom wrote:
Doubles itself! Yeah, the case was closed first post.
Had to reiterate that.
Release or contract, just understand what you are agreeing to.
Photographer
Barry Kidd Photography
Posts: 3351
Red Lion, Pennsylvania, US
There are also many types of work that need to be considered on this idea of a 50/50 split and it's fairness. The image below was part of a set that was used in a political advertizment. The client is running for US Congress this year and the end goal isn't monetary profit. No money changed hands for the shot but the steal workers were supporters of his campaign. If he gets elected should the people in the photo share in the legislative process? Should they and the 30 or so other people in photographs at 5 different locations that day get cut of what I made for the days work? Perhaps they should get a percentage of the entire production should he get elected? That would be insane but is a great example of how the concept of a 50/50 split or even a 10/90 split just doesn't work. In the end their reward is a candidate that supports their core beliefs is in congress. For a model shooting TFP their reward is photos and for the model that was paid their reward is cold hard cash for services provided. Someone may say that it's different and should be handled differently but it's not. It's the samething and anyone that suggest that is just viewing themselves and what they do or services that they offer differently. . ![https://www.barrykidd.com/wp-content/gallery/political-01/lloyd-smucker-for-congress-2016-254.jpg]()
Photographer
Michael Fryd
Posts: 5231
Miami Beach, Florida, US
Jules NYC wrote:
A contract or release could state anything it does and if two parties agree, it is what it is. I thought the lawyer was pretty knowledgeable. I'm not a lawyer, if you are, do tell.
"A release quick and short is to use a model's likeness for their website/port." This statement can be debated for sure. It could be used for more than a website/port. A release can have any verbiage it wants. I used these exact words because the lawyer was explaining that a contract details specific usage rights and a release should be for general purposes. Whatever those general purposes 'are' should of course be agreed to by both parties. In my earlier post, I should have worded that differently; I was regurgitating what I just heard. Maybe the lawyer stressed what a release 'should' be used for in his opinion.
Each and every release is different, otherwise every release would have the exact same language if no money is to be made. Contracts would be specific to the cause.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: R. Sebastian Gibson
Attorney Sebastian Gibson has over 35 years experience representing entertainment clients. His clients have included celebrities, writers, artists in music, film and television, and models from around the world. With law degrees and experience in California and Great Britain and experience obtaining a seven-figure copyright and trademark infringement settlement in a case involving a nationally known figure, Sebastian Gibson is uniquely talented to represent celebrities, models and individuals whose publicity rights or privacy rights have been violated. With offices in Orange County and the Palm Springs and Palm Desert area home to writers, the Coachella Music Festival, Palm Springs International Film Festival and Indian Wells BNP Paribas Tennis Open, Sebastian Gibson is the attorney for all things entertainment and creative.
This attorney is not a fan of releases being used as contracts. Too bad in a MM thread we can't conference call him on multiple lines and for the 5 minutes I spoke to him, I got the heavy impression that both releases & contracts should specific. Contracts are surely more specific to *many variables here*.
Is ANYONE an attorney that specifically specializes in modeling contracts here?
Was Farrah's agency full of bad legal advice? If the law was so self-explanatory and simple, why do people sue for these cases 24/7?
Why don't YOU give specific advice to the OP then on what she is looking for and send her a copy of the release she should use and a contract for her. That way she could do a side by side comparison of what the photographer drafts so she doesn't get screwed.
I've been published in magazines (and more than I show in my port) and there was no fancy contract drawn, just a release. Since I was published in the mag and they weren't selling dolls and shit of me, it was pretty simple, each and every time. I never asked for a percentage of profits for something a local photographer and I wanted to accomplish. It could be a guy that wants to make posters or a calendar and prints it in Staples for all we know. I think there is some confusion as the word "contract" is being used with two different meanings.
A "contract" is a legal term for a document that is structured in a certain fashion. Typically it will have a phrase similar to "in exchange for ..."
A "Model Release" can be structured as either a "contract" or a simple grant of rights. Many prefer to structure the Model Release as a contract because that makes it harder for the model to revoke her permission.
There is also the generic term "contract" which is used to describe the overall arrangement between the parties. While it is possible for this agreement to be the same document as the model release, many prefer to keep the model release as a separate document.
When an attorney says the model release should be a contract, I suspect he is suggesting that the release document be structured as a legal contract, not that the release should contain all the terms and agreements of the shoot.
A "Model Release" can be limited or unlimited. Organizations such as Playboy used to demand unlimited releases. The model granted the right to use her likeness for any legal purpose in all media for all time.
Agencies tend to negotiate limited releases for their models. The model's fee is influenced by the rights granted. The model may only grant rights to use her likeness in a domestic magazine advertisements for a period of one year. The Agency release is generally written into the "voucher", a document which also records the hours work, and the pay of the models. This coalesces all of the typical paperwork into one sheet of paper.
If there are other terms (such as a revenue sharing agreement) these would typically be in a separate document, and not in the "Model Release".
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
Michael Fryd wrote:
You would have to speak to the attorney as the information you wrote is not what he said.
His number is on the article I posted if you are so inclined.
Everything is wording so I don't think a law school student/graduate or tog, model (agency repped or not) can speak about the law as effectively as a practicing lawyer dealing with this specific industry and issue... whoever that is.
I know what I'm signing each and every time I work and I have gigs booked a lot.
I got signed in my 30's but have been freelancing in modeling since 1998 & book my own work a lot. This Friday I will be singing a release.
I never had a problem with a release or a contract, not once.
This thread is not enjoyable lest informative now.
No snark, malice or ill-will.
I can't hash out someone else's problem.
I sincerely hope the OP knows what to do because I see a lot of arguing & postulating but no simple advice for the OP. Does the OP know how to draft a contract? Does the photographer know how?
If I have time & if it's relevant, I'll ask Judge Milian tomorrow.
On second thought, nah... it's not as interesting as the cases.
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
Model Mayhem says: Releases Your right to use the image comes from either a usage or license agreement, or some other form of consent. Sometimes this consent may be implied, but I’m not going to get into that here. There are also fair use issues, as well as Standard Industry Practices (SIP) that may govern certain things you can or cannot do with any images you may get back from the shoot. But a model release by itself is of no direct value to the model, only the consideration that’s usually part of a separate agreement or understanding is.
In situations where you do sign a model release, have the use spelled out. Contracts *Says nothing about selling posters/calendars, etc. and sharing profits, just talks about getting signed with an agency. Maybe MM Edu should get on this.
Photographer
Michael Fryd
Posts: 5231
Miami Beach, Florida, US
Jules NYC wrote:
You would have to speak to the attorney as the information you wrote is not what he said.
His number is on the article I posted if you are so inclined.
Everything is wording so I don't think a law school student/graduate or tog, model (agency repped or not) can speak about the law as effectively as a practicing lawyer dealing with this specific industry and issue... whoever that is.
I know what I'm signing each and every time I work and I have gigs booked a lot.
I got signed in my 30's but have been freelancing in modeling since 1998 & book my own work a lot. This Friday I will be singing a release.
I never had a problem with a release or a contract, not once.
This thread is not enjoyable lest informative now.
No snark, malice or ill-will.
I can't hash out someone else's problem.
I sincerely hope the OP knows what to do because I see a lot of arguing & postulating but no simple advice for the OP. Does the OP know how to draft a contract? Does the photographer know how?
If I have time & if it's relevant, I'll ask Judge Milian tomorrow. The OP did get simple advice: Don't work on commission. Get enough compensation upfront that you are happy.
If you do decide to go with a revenue sharing agreement, be careful as to how it is written. Do you get a share of the gross, the profits, or something else?
The bulk of the discussion has been about what to do if there is a revenue sharing agreement, should that agreement be in the same document as the model release, or a different document?
Model
Jules NYC
Posts: 21617
New York, New York, US
Michael Fryd wrote:
The OP did get simple advice: Don't work on commission. Get enough compensation upfront that you are happy.
If you do decide to go with a revenue sharing agreement, be careful as to how it is written. Do you get a share of the gross, the profits, or something else?
The bulk of the discussion has been about what to do if there is a revenue sharing agreement, should that agreement be in the same document as the model release, or a different document? Curious what the OP worked out with the tog.
Somebody has to draft something.
She wanted royalties.
Being careful to how it's written is not enough.
Do you know how easy it is to dance around words and dispute them?
Clear language is best if it's that.
Really not much to discuss. The OP is probably like 'fuck this shit', I'm out.
Me too.
There's a song about that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FjWe31S_0g
The bulk of the discussion has been about what to do if there is a revenue sharing agreement, should that agreement be in the same document as the model release, or a different document?
I know how I'd answer that.
Answer that MM Edu.
Photographer
J O H N A L L A N
Posts: 12221
Los Angeles, California, US
Michael Fryd wrote:
I think there is some confusion as the word "contract" is being used with two different meanings.
A "contract" is a legal term for a document that is structured in a certain fashion. Typically it will have a phrase similar to "in exchange for ..."
A "Model Release" can be structured as either a "contract" or a simple grant of rights. Many prefer to structure the Model Release as a contract because that makes it harder for the model to revoke her permission.
There is also the generic term "contract" which is used to describe the overall arrangement between the parties. While it is possible for this agreement to be the same document as the model release, many prefer to keep the model release as a separate document.
When an attorney says the model release should be a contract, I suspect he is suggesting that the release document be structured as a legal contract, not that the release should contain all the terms and agreements of the shoot.
A "Model Release" can be limited or unlimited. Organizations such as Playboy used to demand unlimited releases. The model granted the right to use her likeness for any legal purpose in all media for all time.
Agencies tend to negotiate limited releases for their models. The model's fee is influenced by the rights granted. The model may only grant rights to use her likeness in a domestic magazine advertisements for a period of one year. The Agency release is generally written into the "voucher", a document which also records the hours work, and the pay of the models. This coalesces all of the typical paperwork into one sheet of paper.
If there are other terms (such as a revenue sharing agreement) these would typically be in a separate document, and not in the "Model Release". The world is certainly ending soon, as I concur with this.
Model
Jen B E
Posts: 213
Hesperia, California, US
Jules NYC wrote:
...Preparedness meets opportunity....
Photographer gets major notoriety but did he get a cut from the sales or just the 1K? Serendipity favors the ready, right?
Another great share from you ma'am!
Jen
Model
Jen B E
Posts: 213
Hesperia, California, US
J O H N A L L A N wrote:
This just goes to show one can find a lawyer who doesn't know (or kinda knows) what he's talking about. This is why one has to be careful about just "talking to a lawyer" for specific vertical advice. They often don't practice in the area one's asking about.
This is a hodgepodge mixture of nonsense, partial truth, and commercial practice for a narrow scope of engagements. Thanks Sir,
I noticed but failed to recognize before that you and a few more couple other photographers also brought the West Coast commercial intel you bring to this thread too.
Jen
p.s. I notice the OP did a hit an run
Photographer
Andrew Koenig
Posts: 363
Gillette, New Jersey, US
thiswayup wrote:
That's what the model is asking for. She's not asking that include a contract with third parties - she's saying that her agreement with the photographer is contingent on sharing revenue on deals he makes. This only requires the model's signature, just like any variation on permission granted in a contract. I hope you're not serious. For if what you're saying is true, the model could write anything on a piece of paper and sign it, and the photographer would be obligated to go along.
It seems to me that if there is any agreement that obligates someone, such as a photographer, to do something, such as hand part of the profits from sale of a photograph to a model, then the person undertaking the obligation would have to sign that agreement to document the intent to comply with the obligation.
|
